Feb
1
2008
1
2008
Ron Paul
Filed under: 2008 Election, Activism
In the past few days I’ve been reminded just how biased our media outlets are and that they play too big of a role in determining who our next president will be. Please do your OWN research…don’t believe anything until YOU find it out for yourself. Question everything! Matt and I have been researching Ron Paul and we like we we’re learning. Just wanted to pass this video on to you…and this one too. Here is Ron Paul’s statement of faith…I urge you to check out his site and read his platform. Even if you’re one of those who “doesn’t care about politics”…or if you are voting for another candidate…it’s still great to be informed.
I would also highly recommend watching the documentary by Aaron Russo called America: Freedom to Fascism. It’s an eye-opener. The entire movie is here on Google.
Posted by Sara @ 3:43 pm | Leave a Comment
Sara
Daughter of the Almighty. Wife. Mama. Sister. Friend. Traveler. Photographer. Designer. Tea drinker. Reader. Knowledge seeker. Google lover. Kitchen dweller. Dreamer. Leader. Homebirther. Breastfeeder. Homeschooler. Lover of life.
1
2008
Don’t forget to vote in the primary!!
1
2008
I’m a Democrat, but having watched many of the debates, Ron Paul comes across as more coherent than most of the other GOP candidates.
However, the most disturbing thing I have read about Ron Paul is this diary about some of his newsletters from the 1990s.
2
2008
I should add that I totally agree that the media have unfairly marginalized Ron Paul, as well as several of the Democratic candidates whom I preferred to Clinton and Obama.
2
2008
Sarah! You have to see this entry: http://yiddishsparkles.blogspot.com/2008/02/doctrine-of-signatures.html
I should have posted it at your food blog though.
A few of my closest friends are big, big RP fans and they have been donating and spreading his news hardcore. It’s nice to see someone out of state actually even mention him. The media has really opened my eyes to their incredible poopiness as far as controlling what they put out there. We literally have a long list of the times RP has been “skipped over” by FOX and the like. It’s incredible.
Anyway! Sorry, shouldn’t ramble. I hope you find a liking to the article I pointed you to!
2
2008
That Aaron Russo film is wonderful. S and I watched it last night. (VERY LONG!!) But worth it. Just goes to show you where you should put your trust–in GOD, not man. Thanks for the link.
2
2008
Laurie…thanks for bringing that up. I went and read the journals, and was surprised because the wording doesn’t even sound like Ron Paul. During election time, I choose to focus on the entire scope of who a candidate is and his consistent character and record in public service …not just what his opponents are digging up on him…whether it be true or false. No one can prove he even wrote these words…and it seems so silly that it’s been brought up to this level in the media. On his website, there is a response to these writings:
January 8, 2008 5:28 am EST
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:
“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person’s character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’
“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It’s once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”
2
2008
Yay! So glad to see a freedom and liberty lover. It is so frustrating to me the control the media (or those above them) have over the elections. If a person weren’t informed they would REALLY think that the election were ONLY between 2 people in 2 parties. It’s crazy. We need to make our voices heard that we are not just controlled by what the media tells us!
2
2008
Oh dear, Sara. This so disturbs me. The thing is, I used to like Ron Paul, too, but then I did some reading and realized that Ron Paul is one of two things: 1) A racist; or 2) A man who allowed terribly racist things to be frequently and repeatedly published under his name. Either way, I come to the same conclusion that this is not a person who is fit to lead.
2
2008
I was introduced to your blog through Liz who posted at 9:01 this morning; I love your blog.
Anyway, just wanted to say, it’s exciting to me that you are spreading the word about Ron Paul. It’s so true, that if we look into it ourselves, we’d be delightfully surprised by our own opinions. Especially when it comes to politics (for those of us who have a hard time not getting frustrated with politics).
2
2008
My advice would be not to have a newsletter published under your name without reviewing the content, as Ron Paul claims that he did.
Frankly, that excuse doesn’t sound too likely to me. But who knows?
He has a coherent ideology. I don’t think the solutions he proposes are practical, but I give him credit for trying to create a space for libertarians in the GOP.
2
2008
I can see your point Laurie…it was a foolish mistake if that is how it went down. Leta…I appreciate your concern. However…RP is still WAY ahead of anyone else in my opinion in the way of his ideas. I’m not going to base my opinion of him on something he MIGHT have said 18 years ago.
2
2008
I agree that the media shapes political discouse (and choice) to a scary degree. I study Russian Politics, and its funny how many Americans will look down their noses at a pseudo-democracy for blatently using/controlling the media, when what occurs in our own backyard is not all that dissimilar (maybe a difference of degree, but not kind).
I am personally a non-voter (for many varied reasons), but my husband really likes Ron Paul. And these types of discussions are really good.. it really seems like this (personal forums) really capture the spirit of democracy. So, thanks.
3
2008
First let me say I really enjoy your blog. So today you were my first stop and my last because I sat and watched the whole Russo documentary and WOW! What and eye opener. I’m glad you posted the link otherwise someone such as myself might not have ever stumbled across it.
3
2008
There is much about Ron Paul that I like, but some of it (and this is what I hear from him in debates) is naive… espeically regarding foriegn policy.
I did like what he said in the debate in California about the President’s role in the economy. There shouldn’t be one… except to get out of the way.
3
2008
I am glad you are not swayed by those trying to smear him over the newsletters. I started investigating the newsletter controversy and it apparent with minimal effort that Ron did not write nor have any involvement in the publishing of those documents. Unfortunately, during the time they were published he had a few close friends and a few family members working for him. If it wasn’t him, it had to be one of them. I am sure he does not want to bring them into the political arena for writing this stuff and I suspect that is why he did not address it more.
4
2008
The *actions* of Ron Paul speak louder than his words.
If you search “Ron Paul AFP” you’ll find that Ron Paul has contributed to the American Free Press. AFP is *known* to be the sister publication of The Barnes Review, a holocaust denial publication.
Ron Paul has supported the John Birch Society, which is known to be an organization that is opposed to Civil Rights Laws.
Ron Paul has *spoken* to a dinner hosted by the Barnes Review and the AFP. He claimed ignorance.
He has accepted donations from the proprietor of stormfront, a white nationalist website (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22331091/) as well as David Duke, known to be associated with the KKK.
*His* newsletter with *his* name on it has published *several* appalling articles containing racist commentary.
Either Ron Paul is shockingly naive for a Presidential candidate, or he is complicit. Neither of those things are Presidential qualities.
4
2008
caress, where do you study Russian politics? I used to write about Russian politics as a full-time job in the Yeltsin years, and I continued to write as a freelancer during Putin’s first term. Depressing stuff.
4
2008
i study at miami university in ohio. its a small political science department (as far as grad students go). what publication did you write for?.. feel free to email me, i’d love to chat about it.
5
2008
Sara, I am happy to see this post in support of Dr. Paul, and even happier to see more people taking the initiative to be truly informed on issues that are vital to our country at this time. I have been a Dr. Paul supporter since long before most people knew his name, so it’s awesome to hear new voices in support of what I’ve known for a long time.
In regards to the newsletters, I can’t begin to tell you how silly this entire debacle has been. The fact is, it will be very, very hard to find any dirt on Ron Paul. He is a Christian who has lived a life dedicated to his wife of 51 years and their very large family. He is the classic American-boy-makes-good kind of guy who served in the military and then settled down to raise a family. He has been consistent and trustworthy in his personal life as well as his public service, so finding dirt on him is not going to be easy. Consequently, when someone “thinks” they’ve happened upon something, no matter what it is, it’s going to make headlines.
What happened as a result of the “newsletters” story outbreak was just that…people scrambling to try to make it something big. They didn’t succeed. These accusations were first leveled years ago, questions were asked and answered then, and Dr. Paul has answered honestly. He has said on several occasions since then that he regrets the situation. There is not much he can do at this point. Interestingly, the story pretty much fizzled out when it was determined there really was no more “dirt” to dig up about it other than what people have known for years.
As for others writing under his name, this is very, very common. Those in office are often far too busy to actually write articles themselves, and they give the reins for their newsletter over to someone else. During this most recent outbreak of this “news that’s not news,” I was reading some opinions on it and one man said that he was thrilled by an article in a newsletter that he received from his congressman, a Democrat. The article was quite libertarian-leaning and this guy was very excited to see his congressman thinking this particular issue through and coming to a semi-conclusion that they had addressed the issue wrongly. Soon after that, at a speech, he was able to meet the congressman in person. He went up to him and thanked him for the article, said how good it was to read it, and that he was encouraged by the congressman’s thoughts on the matter. The congressman immediately looked like a deer in the headlights, and it became quite clear that he had not written that article and in fact had no idea who had.
I tell you that only to emphasize the fact that it is quite common for an associate or someone in the office to write articles for “The Office Of (Politician).” I don’t think it’s necessarily smart, despite being generally accepted, and I think Dr. Paul shouldn’t have allowed it, but what more can he do now than say that he regrets that he did so?
As for the couple of campaign contributors who are less than exemplary, all I can say is give me a break. I guarantee that every one of the candidates have people contributing to their campaigns with whom they would have serious idealogical differences. Surely they can not all be expected to call and interview each contributor and find out exactly where they stand on each and every idealogical issue, and then determine whether to keep and use the money they contributed. That’s hardly plausible. The reason this made the news was because it was a recognizable name. If you’re really going to hold Dr. Paul’s feet to fire over this issue, then we need to check every single contributor to every single campaign, so the candidate can make some sort of statement about why or why not he will accept funds from any person if they are found to have questionable ideaologies. Or maybe we can just roll our eyes heavily at someone like David Duke, wish people like him would quit making scenes and drawing attention off the real issue, and go on about our business…which for the Ron Paul campaign is keeping you free.
5
2008
I am horrified at the blind trust people give to documents on the internet as well as to the federal government. Ron Paul and his voting record speak for themselves. He is in favor of freedom. Not just politically correct freedom for people you deem worthy, but complete, across the board freedom. The freedom of a family to attend the church of their choice, the freedom to join a white nationalist group, the freedom to join the New Black Panthers group, and most importantly the freedom to use OUR money as we see fit. The minute we discount someone for spreading their message to a group we deem “unfit” that is the minute the FIRST AMMENDMENT is in jeopardy. Wake up people!! Ron Paul is neither shockingly naive nor complicit. He is fighting for EVERYONE’s rights.
First they ignore you,
Then they ridicule you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win. ~Ghandi
I am happy to see us move into the ridicule stage of the game, we’re making progress!!
6
2008
Papaya Mom,
I have given money to AFP and I have neither heard nor seen any evidence that it is related to holocaust denial. AFP has done many excellent expose’s on crooked politics. I am not a holocaust denier and neither is Ron Paul. I suppose that is naive if you would consider somebody shopping at a grocery store that is owned by holocaust denier to be naive. How was I/ he suppose to know that? I will research it soon enough but if you care to supply me with a VALID source, that would be appreciated.
I know lots of lovely people involved in the John Birch Society and JBS is not against “civil rights laws”, it is against certain civil rights laws, particularly those enforced by the Federal Government. They are not against civil rights, they are against the Federal Government doing things it shouldn’t be doing. Care to share with me what laws you are referring to that makes them so evil?
I am curious to know what evidence do you have that Ron spoke at a Barnes Review Conference, that it was (in fact) a Barnes Review Conference, and that he knew it was and proceeded to speak there anyway? I have to admit, so far your evidence against Ron has been extremely weak, you might actually have something here to show he is naive but I need evidence.
I read an article that Bush was endorsed by the KKK and received money from many white supremest groups and nobody said anything? Bush did not send it back and nobody expected him to. Ron has said he does not accept the “small mindedness” of racists and the head of the NAACP in Texas who had known Ron for 20 years did an interview saying that Ron is not racist. So, just curious to know why you think that is? Not only that, the guy from stormfront caught a bunch of grief from his fellow racists because Ron said he was considering a black judge as his VP. Now why would a racist do that? I suppose you are going to believe what you want to.
*his* newsletter with *his* face started back in the 80’s and he published over 10 years of articles, none of which had anything offensive in it. Then for a few years in the 90’s, it suddenly turned dark. This happens to be when Ron was NOT involved with the newsletter and was traveling the country doing conventions and various activist related activity. Then by the end of the 90’s, there is no more questionable stuff. He said he didn’t write it, what more do you want from the man. Cut the guy SOME slack already.
Perhaps liberals are shockingly offended by a free market conservative getting so much support from Democrats? Maybe, they are SO pro socialism that Ron is a threat to their political agenda and they are pulling out everything they can find on him to smear him? Do I think so? YES. The same people who are smearing him with this nonsensical garbage and accusations are the same people who were screaming racist when he voted no for the Rosa Parks coin. Even though he offered to split it up in congress and pay his share out of his own pocket. He is the only politician that had the balls to say he would pardon all non violent drug offenders as President because they are jailed for systematic racism. He is the only Republican who EVER considered a black vice president in history of the U.S.. Well, I guess he MUST be a racist. Some people believe what they want to regardless of the facts. Don’t let these people discourage you.
6
2008
Sara,
Hey, it’s Julie Luse from Boulder CO. I LOVE Ron Paul, it’s cool finding out that you and Matt are thinking that too! The sad truth is, that I don’t think he stands a chance unless he plans to run at an independent, and he probably could because his supporters are still handing over lots of money to keep him running. Oh, we’ll see!!!
JUlie
7
2008
Sara,
So glad to see your family seeking out truth. I find it nearly amusing the lies people had to scrape up in order to find (false) dirt on Ron Paul. If people just look at his record, follow his campaign and compare that to the allegations it just doesn’t add up to be true. Especially if you compare him to the other candidates. What a nightmare those supposed ‘conservatives’ are. I feel with Ron Paul you can vote for a man of principle and honesty instead of the lesser of two evils, which is something this country hasn’t been able to do in a very long while.
7
2008
If this much dirt, some of which was admitted to by Ron Paul himself, was brought to light regarding *any* candidate I’d run for the hills before supporting them. And I don’t care how long ago/how much he didn’t know/so sorry it was a mistake he feels, this is for President of the United States, for Pete’s sake, not the chair of a rural PTA Special Events and Parties committee (and think about it, would you even want somebody in your PTA with that background?) If it walks like a duck…..
9
2008
A meme for you from me http://love2bgreen.blogspot.com/2008/02/meme-between-sneezes.html
10
2008
PLEASE read “Are You Conservative, Liberal, Or Confused.” It’s for all ages and is a wonderful book about the original thoughts of the founding fathers and has helped me a lot in sifting through this election.
Here’s the link:
http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Conservative-Confused-Uncle-Eric/dp/0942617541
Amelia
11
2008
Sara:
I tagged you with The Happiness Meme. Details are on my blog. I hope you choose to play. We’re looking forward to seeing you in April. There’s lots of things brewing in Austin and the Hill Country. Take care, E
11
2008
If you’re concerned about the “dirt” on Ron Paul and wouldn’t vote for him based on it, I guess you’re not voting at all. Ron Paul and his “dirt” is a drop in the bucket compared to ANY other candidate running. If you don’t believe me, you haven’t done unbiased research.
12
2008
Mama Bear, you guess wrong. And rampant bigotry is a more like a monsoon than a drop in the bucket, though we’re all entitled to our own opinions. Hopefully the best choice for president will be the voters’ choice!
Thanks Sara for allowing all sides of this discussion on your blog….off to see if there’s any Happy Foody updates!
13
2008
Sara,
I’m curious to know how you feel about Paul’s ideas on the environment? I am an Obama supporter, but I do find Paul fascinating. My understanding is that he believes all environmental legislation should be up to the states? I don’t understand how this can adequately protect our earth and our children?
15
2008
Hi Heather,
Ron Paul’s position is, as always, the constitutional one. The environment is an extension of property rights. Simply put, it is against the law for somebody to vandalize or devalue your property or public property. Therefore, if you are drinking water or breathing air that is polluted on your own property, the person who has done so has violated the law and can be punished in court. The problem with this is that many of our elected officials have not enforced the law and is typically in violation of the law, much of the time. Enforcement of property rights would force companies to either manage pollution to where it does not effect others property or totally eliminate it. To date, there is no way to adequately manage pollution but one could eliminate it.
17
2008
Ron Paul is the only candidate that I know of who is both Anti-War and Pro-Life. But there is more to Mr. Paul than those two issues.
Ron Paul is more of a Libertarian than a Republican, which is not all bad… but that puts public funding of social programs and education in question if he were to become President.
Having said all that… he seems to be a good compromise between the Dems and the other Republicans.
I wish that he had been given more respect at the debates and more press coverage.
Kevin
http://www.hippiechristian.blogspot.com
28
2008
Hey, I know the Hippy Christian. Ha, small world.
7
2008
Hi Sara,
Another movie that I found much more compelling and well put together, but that Aaron russo also had a part in is called zeitgeist. It can be watched here:
www.zeitgeistmovie.com
Leave a Reply
Wisdom
– Henry David Thoreau
Recent Posts
Blogroll
Happy Places
Inspiration
Categories
Archives
Meta