He has been around forever, but I used to get most of my information from the news, and you don't see much of him on the news at all. I thought my only real choices were Republican or Democrat. I am a conservative, but turned off my many of the popular Republicans. I didn't vote at all last election because I just couldn't get behind McCain who repulsed me, or Obama who I don't agree with on pretty much everything.
Jared and his brother have really started investigating Ron Paul's ideas and libertarianism and I have to say, it is definitely what speaks to me more than any other party. When I started reading about Ron Paul and watching his videos, I was amazed at how many of his opinions were ones I already shared. It was very validating and inspiring to see how he explained things.
Here are the a few of the issues that were important to me. Jared is more interested in his knowledge of the monetary systems. I think those things are interesting too, but these are the ones that jumped out at me and that I can actually explain ; ). I do think balancing the budget and having a sound monetary system makes sense, particularly with what is happening in our economy right now.
Free Market:
"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism. A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank. It's not capitalism when the system is plagued with incomprehensible rules regarding mergers, acquisitions, and stock sales, along with wage controls, price controls, protectionism, corporate subsidies, international management of trade, complex and punishing corporate taxes, privileged government contracts to the military-industrial complex, and a foreign policy controlled by corporate interests and overseas investments. Add to this centralized federal mismanagement of farming, education, medicine, insurance, banking and welfare. This is not capitalism! "
RON PAUL, speech, U.S. House of Representatives, Jul. 9, 2002
Vaccinations:
I think our life experiences shape our political views. Immunization problems are something I've lived firsthand, so while I'd never expect it to be a big issue to most people, it is to me. I tend to be an independent person who doesn't like to be forced to do anything. I don't like government to make decisions for me regarding what gets injected into my child, or where and how I have my babies. I hate big government.
“When we give government the power to make medical decisions for us, we, in essence, accept that the state owns our bodies ~U.S. Representative Ron Paul, MD.” Love this quote.
As a medical doctor, he acknowledges the importance of vaccines in saving lives, and uses polio as an example of how successful vaccines have been in eradicating disease. But he also addresses the problems associated with too many vaccines, and government mandated vaccines. An individuals right to choose what goes into our bodies should be protected.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2009-10-28/ron-paul-on-h1n1-freedom-of-choice-for-all-americans/
I love that Libertarianism limits government and supports individual freedoms.
Borders/Immigration
I've spent a lot of time in Mexico. I love the Mexican people. I hate the negative rhetoric that persists when talking about immigration. I love how Ron Paul explains it. It is rational, fair, and acknowledges the work ethic and the desperation that drives illegal immigration and the fact that we do need some sort of work program to employ these people without providing incentives to break the law. We cannot have a welfare state AND open borders. That makes sense to me.
Foreign Policy:
Ron Paul is most often criticized for his foreign policy. This is actually what I love most about him. For years now I've been frustrated with the way the U.S. has too much involvement in trying to control foreign governments. Arming those we think we might be able to influence. Our list of leaders we helped get into power include Pinochet, Castro, Saddam Hussein and many, many others. This is not disputed. Influencing the leadership of other countries is not our job. It is not something we should participate in because we are unable to simply choose leaders for other people. Isn't that the heart of democracy? Being able to choose for yourself who leads you? Then why are we setting a poor example of what democracy is by choosing and supporting leaders for other countries who did not elect us to be their protector? What happens when these dictators turn out to be butchers? These CIA led coups encourage violence, instability and civil war and is completely wrong. I hate the way the American people are manipulated into supporting these wars. I have been manipulated, and that makes me angry. The very predictable and cyclical media war propaganda is very much like the swine flu hype--scare tactics. I hate it. This type of propaganda preys on the good hearts of the U.S. people who legitimately want to help and want to save these poor people from their oppressors. But unfortunately, we don't have many examples of how our bombing or coups have actually helped implement a stable democratic government, and the people in the countries we've "helped" have hailed us as their Saviors. This is generally where the cognitive dissonance kicks in to people who have never explored American history from an objective view. It is hard to accept that we are not always the good guys. We are a good people and I love our country. We have been manipulated in many instances. However, we also need to examine our motives and learn from past mistakes. I think in decades to come, we'll look back on this part of our history and see it as we see imperialism.
What alarms me most is how fearful Americans are of Islamic people. The news is propagating a lot of this. I've met a lot of Muslims and people from the Middle East. They were warm, friendly, and kind. I loved this quote too:
"If we hate racism, we must also hate war since it is war that has bred malignant types of racism. In our time, we observe the same happening to those of the Islamic faith. Members of both parties demonize people and encourage an anti-Islamic feeling. Christians are being told, as in George Orwell's 1984, that "we've always been at war with Islam," that Islam is an inherently warlike religion, that "they" are taking over America with their mosques, clothing, & law. This whole campaign has the earmarks of a new Cold War, and perhaps hot war, in which Islam replaces atheistic communism as the enemy.
What is striking about this form of racism is how little it has to do with reality. The 9/11 hijackers were not devout Muslims, but we are often led to believe that they were. The government of Saddam Hussein was secular. What none of this mentions is that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism lived in peace, sometimes in the same regions of Europe, for some 700 years between the 8th and 15th centuries."
"A foreign policy that endorses worldwide intervention and occupation requires that people live in perpetual fear of supposed enemies. In the post-9/11 period, proponents of such policies have been able to promote the fear needed for the American people t accept policies they otherwise would have rebelled against. Fear has enabled permanent runaway domestic surveillance and the sacrifice of privacy through legislation such as the Patriot Act. A citizen walking through the airport today is bombarded with 1984-style propaganda messages that are designed to make us fear some amorphous threat and also be suspicious of others. The government designs these messages to make us feel dependent and heavily lorded over in every aspect of our lives. These messages are becoming ever more pervasive, hitting us even in the grocery stores when we are shopping. If we are fearful enough, we are willing to tolerate what might otherwise be regarded as immoral means of dealing with the enemy, such as the use of torture."
I love this video. So funny that the audience actually boos the golden rule. Kinda sad.
Death Penalty:
Ron Paul doesn't support the death penalty. Which is something I agree with. I have felt for a long time that it is better to just incarcerate for life than implement the death penalty. It just seems unnecessary at best, and at worst we execute people that were not guilty of the crime they were executed for. I've found it ironic though that democrats oppose the death penalty and support abortion.
Abortion:
Ron Paul is anti-abortion. I am strongly pro-life and I cannot wrap my brain around why some people support abortion as "choice." I actually support a morning after pill, or even a pill that can be taken within the first few weeks of pregnancy for cases of rape, etc. I see no reason why we should have the option of abortion beyond that time frame. Paul has the same views on this as I do.
"In the 1960s when abortion was still illegal, I witnessed, as an OB/GYN resident, the abortion of a fetus that weighed approximately 2 pounds. It was placed in a bucket, crying and struggling to breathe, and the medical personnel pretended not to notice. Soon the crying stopped. This harrowing event forced me to think more seriously about this important issue. That same day in the OB suite, an early delivery occurred and the infant boy was only slightly larger than the one that was just aborted. But in this room everybody did everything conceivable to save this child's life. My conclusion that day was that we were overstepping the bounds of morality by picking and choosing who should live and who should die. There was no consistent moral basis to the value of life under these circumstances. Some people believe that being pro-choice is being on the side of freedom. I've never understood how killing a human being, albeit a small one in a special place, is portrayed as a precious right."
Speaking of babies, my little guy needs me, so I'll end this long political post. I wish I could vote for Romney in good conscience. It wouldn't really matter anyway since I'm in Utah. But I'm unhappy with how the Republicans treated Ron Paul and how the rules were changed at the RNC effectively making it impossible for Ron Paul to even be on the ballot. It just isn't right to change the rules at the last minute, and I can't support that. And Romney's big tough talk on foreign policy just gives me the willies. So I guess I'll either be writing in Ron Paul, or voting for Gary Johnson, just to prove a point.
