Slashdot Mirror

Ron Paul is a DIFFERENT kind of Republican. If you had ever researched anything he had to say you would quickly realize there. Here is a good starting point: http://ronpaullibrary.org/

I wrote a pretty long response to this and then decided it was garbage.

I will grant you that the campaign could do a better job giving bullet point plans for specific things.

However, I would suggest that the reason they haven't done this is not so much that they are like every other campaign, but because Ron has been in Congress 20 years and has proposed hundreds of pieces of legislation, and they have too much faith in people doing their own research. It's also true that his message is just simpler than most. He doesn't need a 600-page plan to explain how he's going to leave you alone so you can solve your problems as works best for you instead of as dictated by Washington. The Constitution allows the Federal Government to do very little. This is not a bug, it's a feature.

They did recently summarize his economic recovery plan, with specific bills cited. It's currenetly linked from the top-right corner of his page:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/prosperity

For bills he's written on other issues, speeches, etc., see http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/ If you can't find what Ron Paul specifically thinks on pretty much any issue, I'd be very surprised. But if that's the case, you can in fact get an answer. Go to a rally and stick around after and ask him. He's famous for not leaving until everyone has a chance to talk to him. His staff hates it because he has a schedule to keep. But I've seen him take the time to answer in detail some pretty off the wall questions. Beyond that, find people near you who are close to the campaign and let them get you an answer. That's one reason I'm in here today. I've already talked to them about trying to get /. to do a followup since people wanted more details, but I don't know if /. will do it or if the campaign will decide it's a place they can afford the time. If we as a demographic (and I'm not a politico, I'm a Linux Sysadmin, thanks for the apology) want more of these people's attention we have to actually turn out the vote. Not because we want them to pander, but because even the best statesmen have limited time and have to make hard choices on where to spend it. If he has to choose to take an hour to talk to voters in a Super Tuesday state or respond to ALIPAC or respond to /., which would you have him choose? He can't do all of them at once.

The man is trying to run a presidential campaign, and during this period he has been trying to prepare for the Super Tuesday elections. That doesn't leave a lot of time for answering questions. Especially for a candidate who is not bashful about his views, and whose views are based on a clearly stated philosophy and closely held principles.

Even if you don't agree with all of them, at least you know where he stands, or can quickly find out with a little research. That's more than I can say for Mitt "what-did-the-focus-group-say" Romney and his ilk.

You should read a few things:

http://ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=22

http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/questions_maint.php?Category=5&id=159
http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/questions_maint.php?Category=30&id=332
http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/questions_maint.php?Category=30&id=148
http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/questions_maint.php?Category=25&id=128

When someone takes an oath to become a Doc they agree to help people in dire need.

Ron Paul does NOT think people should be dying in the streets.

Perhaps you should do some research on him before you bash him:

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=22

Actually the free market is a natural economic force because it means there are no artificial barriers to entry (such as government regulation).

And unfortunately you are incorrect when you say that "people deserve care just as much as you or I". No one deserves anything other than the right to life, and liberty which are natural rights.

In the free market health care providers would be competing for business which means they would be price competitive. And without governmental regulation their prices would drop because their cost of doing business would be lower.

Take a quick second and read this:
http://ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=22
(it was written by a medical doctor)

Thank you for the link. I learned something I had not previously known.

Ron Paul made a speech just before he voted for that bill.... you can read the entire speech here:
http://ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=635

Here is an excerpt:
"As an obstetrician, I know that partial birth abortion is never a necessary medical procedure. It is a gruesome, uncivilized solution to a social problem......

Unfortunately, H.R. 760 takes a different approach, one that is not only constitutionally flawed, but flawed in principle, as well. Though I will vote to ban the horrible partial-birth abortion procedure, I fear that the language used in this bill does not further the pro-life cause, but rather cements fallacious principles into both our culture and legal system....

Despite its severe flaws, this bill nonetheless has the possibility of saving innocent human life, and I will vote in favor of it. I fear, though, that when the pro-life community uses the arguments of the opposing side to advance its agenda, it does more harm than good."

The department of education is not Constitutional first off, neither is the DHS or FEMA.

And Ron Paul is a different kind of Republican unlike the current crop of neocons. Ron Paul wants a humble foreign policy and to make sure that EVERYONE (not just the wealthy) has lower taxes.

You should consider reading his policy papers here: http://ronpaullibrary.org/

And then search for his voting record. By the way, he voted AGAINST the Patriot Act and against the DMCA and many other bills that trample our civil rights.

You have good points. But Ron Paul is a different kind of Republican.

He is an old school Republican who wants to do away with all of the neocon BS and get us back to the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, and a humble foreign policy.

I am no longer a Republican and swore never to vote for another one unless Ron Paul ran. Honestly the GOP doesn't like him because he is trying to reel them back in off of their mental holiday.

You should seriously do some research on him. Here are some of his original policy pieces:

http://ronpaullibrary.org/

He wants it overturned because it is not within the realm of the power of the federal government to decide whether or not it is legal for someone to perform an abortion.

You should read what he has to say about this here:
http://ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=21

Ron Paul does not want to "prevent women from having an abortion" as you have said.

He wants Roe v Wade overturned so that individual states can make their own decisions.

Have you ever even read any of his papers on abortion (by the way, he was an OB/GYN for years delivering over 4000 babies)

Either you are misinformed or intellectually dishonest. In case it is the later,

See this:
http://ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=21

Well, here's a fine column on that website you linked that should give you a hint. He also voted to ban adoptions by gay couples, and more. Look harder. Look closer at the laws he's sponsored in that post as well.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/