-
Website
http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters -
Original page
http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/2007/10/20/ron-paul-still-hasn%e2%80%99t-left-the-republican-party/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Our nation would have gone through political parties like cheap socks otherwise.
People push for reform and that is why we have only had 2 main parties for the last 150 years. Sure there are offshoots and third parties and independents, but they have never made it, or should I say been allowed to make it in this country.
i'd also like to point that ron paul hasn't "stood behind this administration." if you've read any thing he's written, heard anything he's said, or watched him in any debates, you would know that.
keep it real. comment on shit you know about.
Because of this, any serious contender who is not a billionaire (Bloomberg), must run within those two parties. After listening to his anti-war stances at the debates I'm sure Paul would break out in laughter at the idea that he is behind Bush in any way at all.
Your thinking is a little simplistic to say the least. Ron Paul has spoken out against this administration and their policies for years. Just because he does not agree with the policy does not mean he should run away and leave the party. For him to leave the party would be similar to the neighborhood kid who doesn't like the team he is on and takes his ball and goes home.
Instead of leaving the party, Ron Paul has chosen to stay and fight to CHANGE the party.
God Bless the congressman from the 14th district of Texas. He is showing us that things could be different if we would only take the initiative to change them.
Currently, the media only allows the Demipublican and Republocratic Party to present their "candidates" and THAT IS ALL!
In order for us to have real choice, we need to get a SECOND party before we can consider three. Exactly what has been the difference since 2006 when the people made the statement about their dissatisfaction with Republican leadership by putting Democrats in the majority in Congress? --- NOTHING! Still business as usual for BUSHCo!
Calls should have been made to impeach this tyrant and nothing has been done.
Ron Paul is thankfully on the Republican ticket because this really does at least put the voice of truth in front of the public. Now, if they will just give him a chance to have some time to speak at these "debates", we may learn the truth.
By taking the Republican nomination, Dr. Paul will have an excellent chance of being our next president.
Remember, remember the fifth of November. Ron Paul to raise $10,000,000. That's 100,000 people at $100 each on November 5. thisnovember5th(dot)com
Look up Ron Paul's positions, write what you don't like about it.... if you haven't noticed... It's not about Ron Paul. It's about his message.
It's the constitution stupid!
Seriously, guilt by association again? Thought we covered this already in other articles.
Regardless, Dr. Paul hasn't been standing behind the administration, if anything, he's kicking them in the behinds for going against the party's traditions - granted, Bush Co. has been doing great kicking their own selves.
Not to mention, you obviously haven't read the recent article on the Freedom Agenda Act.
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/102...
If this is the complicity you're implying, then maybe it's you who has revealed your true motives.
Perhaps Mr. Trantow isn't aware that Dr. Paul tried to run as the Libertarian in 1988. It wouldn't be surprising because unless he noticed the name on the ballot he'd have never heard it before. He's the only candidate running who didn't vote for this war and isn't for the status quo.
Ron Paul has come out time and again, in articles published online, in speeches given on the House floor, and even in his book "A Foreign Policy of Freedom" as very critical of the current policies of the Republican Party. He feels it has been hijacked by the neoconservative movement and that it must be taken back.
From Paul's perspective, his party, of the Barry Goldwater/Robert Taft persuasion, has been stolen and he has a right to try and take it back. He has not been complicit in any of the failures of the Bush administration and has not been hesitant to point them out as failures.
He voted against the Patriot Act, which stripped away many civil liberties, and was voted on by Congress before being read. He voted against the Iraq War as illegal and unconstitutional and has declared it a failure ever since. He has spoken out many times against the liberal neoconservative ideology of spreading democracy through force. He voted against the Military Commissions Act, which stripped away habeas corpus and most of the remaining civil liberties that were left by the Patriot Act. He has stated that he is against Executive Orders and signing statements, but has said that one thing he could do as president is create an Executive Order repealing all of Bush's previous ones that ignore the rule of law set down in the Constitution.
So he has not been complicit in anything this administration has taken on, whether it be war or spending. His small government, nonintervention policies are anathema to the Democratic Party, so he can not join them and have an equal amount of time on mainstream media, and are also against the current mainstream of the Republican Party. But they used to be principles the Republican party held, so he has every right continuing to be a part of a party that once aligned with many of his beliefs. Paul wants to bring back the party he has belonged to since at least the 1970's, when he first served in Congress, and return it to its original ideals. Those are his "true motives," along with restoring civil liberties and cutting the size and scope of government.
Please understand that Republican and Democrat are just labels that one politician or another takes on at a certain time. It is more important to look at what ideas and beliefs an individual politician represents, than just focus on which party mantle they are currently assuming. For too many politicians, philosophies are very fluid, changing with whichever party is in control of the White House. For Paul, his philosophies have been the result of many years of study, reading, and trying to learn from history, and they do not change due to shifting in political winds.
Try running outside the 2 party control and see how you do, even Jesus would lose.
Trantow...RP has been in Congress for20 years or so. Yes...he did not leave the Republican party...it left him.
Please spend some time researching Ron Paul. You will find that he has an amazing record of consistency...and voted against this administration "countless failures" time and time again. Complicit? I'm not sure that there is a representative (Rep. or DEMOCRAT) that has been LESS complicit. Do you think a representative should just quit...because his message is not being heard? Please take an hour or so to research Dr. Paul. I believe you may end up with a different point of view.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ron+paul&...
What?
He hasn't left the republican party because the msm only covers the Republican and Democratic parties. This is a very smart decision on his part.
" Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures."
Nothing could be farther from the truth,
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
1 million supporters + $12 each = VICTORY
If we can get 1 million Ron Paul supporters to give $12 each, not only can we reach our goal for the quarter, but we can prove to the entire country that Ron Paul has the largest grassroots support of anyone running for President.
If we can't do this, Ron Paul will not win, no matter how popular his is on the internet!
He is running as a Republican, however, for the simple reason that we wouldn't be having this conversation about Ron Paul if he didn't. There is such an overwhelming media bias to focus on just the Republican and Democratic candidates that running as anything but one of the two will surely mean that you have no chance to win unless you have enough personal wealth to get your view forward, like Ross Perot. The last time anyone but a Republican or Democrat won an American election was the Civil War.
Ron Paul has opposed Bush at every turn. He has opposed Bush's war policies, his domestic policies, every thing Bush has done, Paul has opposed. He voted against the war, against the Patriot act, against the Military commissions act. He has introduced the American Freedom Agenda act which would overturn Bush's anti-freedom policies.
Ron Paul's record of voting against big government tax and spend policies and against an interventionist foreign policy stretches back to 1976. His long, consistent track record reveals his real feelings.
The fact that he hasn't left the GOP simply means that he wants a serious chance of being elected. As a third party candidate he would stand no chance at all, as he well knows from personal experience.
Everyone knows that the TRUE way to fight Bush's failures is to vote in favor of each and every one of them, the way Hillary Clinton did - but to call yourself a Democrat! For it is the name you call yourself that matters, and not your actual votes! TRUE opposition goes along in every detail, but symbolically objects by pledging allegiance to the other faction!
"Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures. His complicity reveals his true motives."
Ron Paul voted NO on the Iraq war, the Patriot act, the Military commions act. Check the facts before you post.
Your statement is completely contrary to reality..
"Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures. His complicity reveals his true motives."
Ron Paul has not stood behind this administrations unconstitutional behavior, his every word and more importantly every action is completely contrary to this administration. He put forward legislation that contradicts and voted against legislation put forth by the president. His voting record goes back decades and I would think that anyone who is against the current administration would be placing all their resources into getting Ron Paul through the primaries and effectively over throwing the republican party and taking it back from the neo-conservatives.
What could a true peace and freedom president from the republican side accomplish in the white house? If the republican base can call him their own, how can any republican congressman vote against him? If he is supporting what the democrats had been calling for all along how can the democrats oppose him? He may have the potential to have the most overwhelming support of both sides of the legislature if he is voted into office as a republican.
Ron Paul has support now from COUNTRIES all over the world, i.e., India, Pakistan, UK, Canada, everywhere.
I encourage everyone to check this candidate out for yourselves and not let Main Stream Media, AGAIN, pick our next President.
Your comments are true. This candidate does not benefit corporate America or the Central Bank but does as you stated, gives power back to the people.
I would think all Americans would stand up now while they still can and vote for this man. Haven't you heard?, the government announced Monday on the Senate floor that our social security checks will stop coming in 7 years, as well as the MediCare payments.
Does Senator Allard truly believe he'll be able to comfortably retire in our State of Colorado when the Social Security checks stop coming in? Considering how long he's been in office, he will be accountable to us when this happens.
I encourage all Coloradians starts speaking up now to Allard and Salazar and remind them who they work for.
Ron Paul has consistantly voted against the war and funding of it. This is a matter of record. Please visit www.ronpaul2008.com and read his positions in his own words.
Ron Paul does not need to leave the republican party, he is it's true savior. The rest of them should leave and form a neoconservative party. based on big government, high taxes, amnesty for illegals, and nation building overseas.
I think when you really look it is obvious, the party has left us, we didn't leave it.
Ron Paul for president 2008!
Third party candidacies do not work in this country. Ron Paul is more than an idealist, he is also a realist. The best chances for him are to stay in the Republican party and revolutionize it from both the inside and from the outside. Very few people in this country listen to voices crying in the wilderness. Ron Paul is a voice crying from within the Republican party, and that is one of the reasons for why people are listening to him. His message is resonating with MANY lifelong Republicans (including myself), and with many on the outside who are now joining the Republican party to restore it to its roots.
Join the revolution.
Go Ron Paul!
1: You have to spend millions just to get on a ballot and some states you can't even get on the ballot
2: you can not participate in an debates
What would be the point?
Maybe a better story would of been a better story than this lie you decided to print : Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures. His complicity reveals his true motives.
HOW ABOUT RON PAULS 20 YEAR VOTING RECORD SETS HIM APART FROM ANY OTHER REPUBLICAN IN HISTORY.
FINALLY A MAN OF HONESTY, INTEGRITY, AND COURAGE THAT WILL TRY TO RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC FROM THE DIS SERVICE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS INSTALLED ON US.
TELL US WHAT HIS TRUE MOTIVES ARE CONSIDERING HIS IMPECABLE 20 YEAR VOTING RECORD.
RON PAUL 2008
Party politics is ridiculous, and evil. God Bless Ron Paul for fighting the good fight.
Dr. Ron Paul does not support the current administration. If you examine his voting record, he has literally voted against almost everything the Bush administration has ever advocated. In fact, in 20 years in Congress he has never voted for anything unconstitutional, earning him the name "Dr. No" in Congress. Lobbyists avoid him.
Dr. Paul advocates a return to traditional Republican values of non-intervention and small government. He is an old-world Republican who has been left behind by the party's current direction. Much more importantly, he wants to turn the clock back to 1776 and fundamentally reevaluate where America stands today. On Oct. 15, he introduced a bill in Congress called the "American Freedom Agenda Act," which would restore in one swift stroke all of the Constitutional freedoms we have lost in the last few decades. If you are interested in reading it, it is only six pages long--nothing secretive. The man is larger than political parties.
I am a career Naval officer who has been politically neutral for my entire life, but this is about voting for America! I now support Ron Paul with my wallet--and my heart.
Please Google Ron Paul, or check out his videos at Youtube.com!
Very respectfully,
J.P.
Just because he's running under the Republican ticket doesn't mean he's a Bush supporter. The Republican platform gives his views a chance to be heard, since third party candidates are shunned by the media, unless you're a billionaire.
Do you journalists do any research anymore, or is it all opinion pieces with no facts? You're scared of Ron Paul, so you have to attack him. Have you no dignity?
Paul, to say your assertion is inaccurate would be an understatement. You certainly aren't familiar with the writings in the www.ronpaullibrary.com where you would find countless Ron Paul speeches and articles critical of this administrations foreign policy, attacks on our individual rights and liberties, and this administrations disregard for sound monetary policy. Not only is Ron Paul critical of this administration he is also critical of the Republican party it's self. He has repeatedly said that the party has lost it's way and is doomed to failure unless it returns to it's Taft Republican roots of a humble foreign policy, no nation building, small government, and the protection of individual liberties.
Why would he leave the Republican party? He is the only true Republican left. Where would he go? Third party's can barely get on the ballots, they get no media attention, and have done terrible in every modern election.
Besides, what are the other alternatives to have a pro-freedom platform while retaining public exposure and ballot access? A decade of protectionist ballot legislation by the Rs and Ds have made it virtually impossible to run successfully as an independent or 3rd party!
Brad
Englewood, CO
But to say that he stands behind the Bush administration is just silly. He, more than Hillary, Obama or Edwards wants our trroops out of Iraq now. He has also just sponsored a bill in Congress that will restore Habeus Corpus, repel the Military Commisions Act, protect journalists who exxpose vagrancies in the Executive branch, AND roll back the Presidential Signing Statements that Bush has used to get around the Congress and our Constitution.
Ron Paul is THE champion of the Constitution and not just another Bush lackey. If elected, he will restore the power of the people which have been taken away by big government colluding with big business and end the power of the military-industrial complex.
Ron Paul - www.ronpaul2008.com .
Can you name a single example?
WTF are you talking about? He is running as a Republican because it is the only way to get into debates and get your vote heard.
You obviously know little about Paul. He wouldn't even accept an endorsement from Bush if Bush offered it.
Go back under your rock or blog about something else, your misinformed.
By remaining in the Republican party Ron Paul does show his true motive: To bring the party back to the place it rightfully belongs as a small-government minded party and reduce spending and avoid unnecessary, undeclared wars.
And if you're thinking (or hoping) for him to make a third party run, he'd done that back in 1988. He understands how the system is rigged against any party challenging the REPUBLICRATS. I'm betting that he'll garner more support among people previously self-disenfranchised by the morass of the current status-quo politics once the primary season starts. It won't be long before Dr. Paul's message of Hope for America reaches the masses, to finally put an end to the third-party-run rumors.
Ron Paul comes from a generation that many of us don't remember. Taft, Goldwater, and Reagan are people Dr. Paul emulates from. The neo-conservative wing of the Republican party dominates now, but that is what we are changing.
Vote for an individual and not the party.
Please, take a few minutes to read Paul's writings at RonPaulLibrary.org, and to watch a few of the many videos of him available on YouTube.com. I'm positive that, after doing so, you will agree completely that Ron Paul is nothing at all like George Bush.
Also, to suggest Ron Paul has been complicit in the Republican Party's recent failures demonstrates that you have not investigated Ron Paul's voting record, which suggest he is a man who votes in line with the Constitution. Unfortunately modern Republicans care more about special interests than they do about upholding the constitution. The fact that Ron Paul is in the Republican Party gives constitutional liberals hope that their agenda can be advanced, within the current system.
If these ideas cannot be advanced within the current system, I fear our country will continue down the long road of authoritarianism and fascism.
Ron Paul A+ Gun Owners of America
Ron Paul A+ Right to Life
Ron Paul A+ Small Government/No IRS
Ron Paul is the real Republican
Ron Paul is not standing behind the Republican party. Have you even been listening to him? He has been one of the most consistent critics of this administration's foreign and domestic policies for the last 7 years.
He was opposed to the Iraq war in 2002. In the words of the Geico caveman, "Maybe next time you could do a little research."
What?
Ron Paul does not stand behind the Bush asministration's failures, and has been one of the strongest critics. Go to Youtube and watch the many videos of Ron Paul for clarity on this, and other issues.
If he left the party, where would he go? He stands the best chance of effecting change in our government from within one of the parties that has a lock on our government, not from the outside. From outside of the two major parties, he'd have little chance of being noticed, and no chance of a successful Presidential campaign.
Thanks for your post. I think you bring up some very good points but I write to point out a very important fact.
You said: "Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administrations countless failures. His complicity reveals his true motives."
The truth of the matter is that Ron Paul has not supported the Bush administrations countless failures. In fact he has offered legislation to repeal many of Bush's disrespect for the constitution. In an interview on NBC news last evening he made it very clear he does not support the administrations positions.
I think it should be also pointed out that Paul is actually reforming the Republican party right before our eyes and many support his minimalists approach to our nations woes.
Ron is really the only true consertiave of the candidates running for office. It's been said that Rudy and Mitt should have ran as a Democrat based upon their history and I would agree.
Congressman Paul knows from experience that the system is rigged against minor party and independent candidates.
Mr. Trantow suggests that Paul's remaining within the GOP "reveals his true motives," but he does not spell out what those motives allegedly are, nor does he makes any defense of this allegation. This is merely guilt by association.
The fact is, Ron Paul's greatest obstacles are coming from within the GOP itself. He is not the establishment's choice. They would prefer any of the others to Ron Paul. That alone makes him a good choice.
Check out Ron Paul's web site and decide for yourself whether Ron Paul deserves your support. He's got mine.
Scott Frost
What would be the point of a primary if all of the people in the party were supposed to be an autonomous machine. You wouldn't have written about him if he was running as a Libertarian. I am not exaggerating when I say that this is by far the most stupid thing I have read about Ron Paul since I started following his campaign, and I have read foxnews.com.
Paul Lake
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/28/busin...
Got to ronpaul2008.com. Also search for "Ron Paul" on youtube.com.
Ron Paul is a Republican. Those in the white house have hijacked the Republican party and are NOT real Republicans.
Ron Paul is running for the Republican party presidential nomination. He represents the people, not special interests, not war hardware manufacturers, the slide toward corporatism and militarism is supported by every other candidate, and you trifle with his party affiliation?
You act like the other party has done something to counter Bush. The Democrats were elected to stop the madness and end the war, instead they approve domestic spying, suspension of habius corpus, and fail to cut of war funding. Ron Paul has been standing alone since 1996 unlike the rest of the failure in Washington and the abysmal crop of GOP Presidential candidates.
Knowing Ron Paul's philosophy and stated goals, I find your statements to be absolutely wrong.
Ron Paul does anything but stand behind this administration. He is one of the most outspoken critics of the administration.
Was your post intentionally misleading, it must be because it is just so far from true.
Dr. Ron Paul is the - one and only - remaining Republican who stands by his party's founding principles. It is Dubya and his neocons who have highjacked the GOP and should therefore leave the party.
By running on the Republican ticket, Ron Paul is only taking the party back from them and restoring it to its Jeffersonian roots.
Because when's the last time a third-party candidate for President actually won the general election? In this day and age, Republicans are no different than the Democrats, making labels irrelevant. That is why it's important to examine the record, and Dr. Paul's record stands tall on its own. It's the record that counts.
Dr. Paul is running as a Republican because he supports the Taft wing of the Republican party and wants to see the party transformed in that light. Unfortunately, it's more difficult for third-party candidates to obtain media exposure and to get ballot access. Even though he's running as a Republican, just look at Dr. Paul now, he just recently started getting increased exposure by the media. Imagine how much more resistance and barriers to entry there would be for him if he was running independently.
Dr. Paul is a conviction politician who says and believes what he says and works only to maximize our individual liberty and to strictly limit the powers of the federal government.
Have you not heard him speak? Have you not looked at his voting record? Have yo not looked at the bills he submits before congress?
Ron Paul says that the two major parties have monopolized political power in America, and they make it very difficult for "3rd" party candidates (and he is correct). That's one of the reasons he's still a Republican. The other reason is that he wants to reform the Republican Party (from within).
Saying that Ron Paul stands behind the Bush administration is like saying that George Washington fought for the British.
"Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures. His complicity reveals his true motives."
Dr. Paul voted against going to war in Iraq and campaigned vehemently against it on the House floor.
What are his true motives?
For 20 years in congress Dr. Paul's voting record has been consistent and pure. If a bill does not follow the Constituion it is voted no on.
Lobbyists do not go near Congressman Paul's office, because they know he can not be bought. He has accepted NO special interest money to help his campaign.
He is a republican, old school, limited government, controlled spending, and lower taxes. He has never voted for an unbalanced budget and returns a portion of his annual congressional budget to the treasury each year.
Reinstate the Constitution! Vote for Ron Paul
Are you kidding? This guy has a 20 year record that proves otherwise. The unfortunate fact is... you simply cannot run a presidential campaign in this country unless you are a part of one of the two major parties. Ron Paul's views are far more traditional conservative than they are liberal... so his only choice to be heard is the Republican party. This is the simple truth of the matter.
Try looking at it from a different perspective... This administration is neo-conservative. The source of the problem is neo-conservativism. They have hijacked the Republican party. The party itself has never been the problem. Ron Paul, if successful, could return the party to its more honorable, traditional conservative roots.
Honestly... what do you think he should do? Run as a libertarian and lose? That seems the only alternative.
It's incredible to me how now even liberals are attacking Ron Paul even though he is irrelevant to their campaign. This knee-jerk counter-revolutionary spin from both democrats and republicans, trying to prove the Ron Paul faithful wrong while never bringing up valid points that the campaign for freedom and a sane foreign policy cant smash, is getting out of hand.
1) Become President of the United States
2) Fight for return of federal government to constitutional bounds.
History tells us that you cannot accomplish the first goal by running as anything but one of the main two parties. Do you feel that the Democratic party would welcome him better than the Republicans? How about the fact that he's spent 20 years in congress as a Republican?
Running as a Libertarian, or on the Constitution Party ticket would doom him to failure because the vast majority of the people in this country have been led to believe that you must vote for a Donkey or an Elephant. In fact, Ron Paul on a third party ticket in this election basically guarantees the Ross Perot effect, where a Clinton becomes president with significantly less than the majority vote.
People have been sold on this false war between D and R, and they don't look at how similar they both are in taking away freedoms and spending our money. They're both set on a course to grab as much federal power as is possible.
Ron Paul is a vote to change the course, and to give back freedom and liberty to the citizens of the United States.
Paul wants to return to a constitutional conservatism (true conservatism, I call it). Where else should the most conservative member of Congress turn to in running for president than the party that is conservative? I find it sad that my party has come to the day that when someone preaches fiscal government, no needless wars and less control over our lives, he's seen as a revolutionary and as someone who should quietly be tucked away in third party status, where we don't have to hear his views. Paul is a true Republican. That is why those like me, who've become so disillusioned, are feeling such excitement again.
However, the five hundred pound gorilla in the room is the oath of office that ALL congressmen take to uphold the Constitution. Ron Paul is the only congressman to distinguish himself for upholding that oath of office. That should be the standard by which we judge candidates of any party.
Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air. Let's listen to what he has to say for a change.
Ron Paul is running against George Bush's abuses and is calling for a restoration of the party's principles. He is the only Republican running who adheres to the party's basic principles of limited government and economic freedom. He is also strongly pro-life. Ron Paul is the only real conservative running in the race. He does not condone what Bush does and has called his foreign policy "disastrous." That hardly qualifies as "stand[ing] behind this administration's countless failures."
I'm a democrat that will be voting for Ron Paul.
May I respectfully request you do some more research on Ron Paul? I can't think of a policy this Administration has advanced that Paul has not opposed. He's stated it is unlikely he will support *any* of the other GOP candidates. The main reasons he is seeking the GOP nominations are that [1] our election system is severely, severely biased against a 3rd party or independent candidate and, [2] Paul actually represents *real* conservatism and the old wing of the GOP that used to respect the Constitution.
Ron Paul has been labeled "Dr. No" by other Republicans because he votes against so many of the GOP's bills... I can't think of a more striking counter argument against your assertion than that. In other words: the entire GOP Congress disagrees with you.
Paul, I believe it is always wrong to presume to know another person's motives, and doubly so when that presumption is based on flawed information. Sadly, it is difficult to find any arguments against Ron Paul online right now that aren't either based on [1] name-calling and hate speech (your comment certainly does NOT fall in this category, so I thank you), or [2] flawed information, which I hope I've shown is, in fact, at work here.
Finally, if you're not yet totally convinced that Ron Paul is anything but a supporter of the current Administration, please read this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/finall...
Thanks for your thoughtful consideration!
Remember that Paul is the real Republican, Bush is the phony,
You mock Washington due to its double talk yet all you do is the same. For instance, you are implying that even though he has a great message and makes sense he is flawed shouldn't be considered because he is associated with the Republican Party and the current administration. ITS THE MAN NOT THE PARTY.
He couldn't run as a democrat as his views on domestic financial policy are a complete 180 from the Democratic party for the last 70-80 years.
He can run as a third party as the campaign regulations are setup in such a way that third parties have no hope (I helped on the 2004 libertarian campaign and saw it first hand - read the regs if you doubt me)
Ron Paul is a TRUE republican in the finest of forms. He's for states rights, individual freedom personal and financial affairs, non-interventionism (not isolationism), peace prosperity and most of all fiscal responsibility at all levels.
It is the majority of the republican party, i.e. the NeoCons, who have left the Republican pary. It is true conservatism, what the majority of Republicans once stood for, that Ron Paul stands for today.
Ellyn, it is the current set of Republicans who have left Ron Paul and the conservative ideology. Ron Paul stands behind NOTHING this administration has done, if fact, all he has done is critisize it every chance he can on the floor of the US house of representatives.
Ellyn, YOU need to do YOUR homework and learn what he stands for.
Sincerely,
Angry Monarcho-capitalist victim.
Your lack of research on the subject you have chosen to write about is shocking and irresponsible. I direct you to Ron Paul's website www.ronpaul2008.com. There you will see the error of your claims. The simple fact is that Ron Paul has consistently and absolutely opposed, not supported as you claim, the Bush administration's misguided policies that have lead to its failures. Ron Paul is the only candidate who voted against the Iraq war from its inception and who continues to voice the strongest opposition against it. Ron Paul courageously and unapologetically opposes this administration's centralization of power and abandonment of this nation's commitment to uphold the rule of law and honor civil liberties. For instance, Ron Paul recently introduced The American Freedom Agenda Act. This Act would prohibit the current and future presidential administrations from taking the same misguided and disastrous actions that the Bush administration has. Moreover, Ron Paul has consistently criticized this administration's expansion of government and unwise monetary policy. I invite you to confront the facts and retract your statement because Ron Paul has not in any way been complicit with the Bush administration's misguided policies and indeed has consistently mounted opposition against them. You are right that Ron Paul hasn't left the Republican Party and that is a good thing because unlike Bush Dr. Paul represents all that is good about the Republican Party and thus offers the Party and indeed this country hope for a better tomorrow. - Jude Columbo
What are you taking about? Ron Paul is the lone voice speaking out against the administrations failures. He is a voice of sanity. He is showing courage and integrity more than any politician in 200 years. He is complicit in nothing. Vote Ron Paul 2008.
He's been ask numerous times why he's a Republican and he says it's because he agrees with what Republicans stood for years ago, not what they stand for today. Plus, it's strategic for his campaign. He wouldn't be getting the attention he's now getting if he wasn't a Republican (or a Democrat) because the media ignore independents and 3rd party members.
He ran as a Libertarian in '88 and got less than 1% of the vote. As a Republican, he's polling as high as 6%. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't run as a 3rd party / independent in '08. He's not happy at all with the Republican party. The Christian Right is mad at it. The Old Right / Paleocons are mad at it. The Libertarians are mad at it. And the Democrats are always mad at it.
If Trantow had been paying attention he would know that this issue has been explaned numerous times by Dr Paul.
It is my contention that Trantow is a Dem party hack and has no real interest in working towards a free America.
Everyone that looks into what Ron Paul and his supporters are trying to accomplish have come away convinced and fired up themselves.
But don't take either of our words as truth. Look him up yourself. Read what he has written over the past twenty years, look at his actions and then make your decision.
www.ronpaul2008.com
I suggest you let his vote record do the talking, not party affiliation.
He is a Republican, it was the Republican party that left him.
He wants to eliminate the euphemistically named “Patriot Act” and the warrant-less unconstitutional searches and wiretaps. See the fourth amendment.
He wants to reestablish congress as the source of coinage to fix the “standards of weights and measures” and gradually wean us from the financial control of the secretive and unelected group of bankers euphemistically known as the “the federal reserve bank”. He thinks money should be based on something real like gold or silver and not being produced out of thin air.
Incidentally, that is why your dollar is practically worthless. The “fed” keeps printing money out of thin air causing what is known as inflation. You will see this inflation thing when you go to the gas pump, buy food or anything else that is not made in China.
He also stands on the platform that “W” first ran on. You know….no nation building…. That little thing that we are doing all over the world especially in the Middle East.
The good doctor believes as the founding fathers did… we should just mind our own business. As a former Republican who voted for Bush I am more convinced than ever that we should just mind our own business and bring all of our military home to protect our own borders. Let the Koreans, Japanese, Germans, British, Iraqis, Saudis, the afghans and wherever else we have military bases, protect their own borders as well.
I strongly believe as the good doctor believes that we need to close all of our foreign bases. That will save a trillion dollars yearly. That money could be better put to domestic use like fixing our crumbling infrastructure.
And that is why I intend to vote for Ron Paul. Whichever party claims him and his beliefs will truly be embracing Republican and Constitutional values.
As for your statement, "Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures."
Where did you come up with this lie?
Ron Voted AGAINST the war in Iraq.
Ron Voted AGAINST the US PATRIOT ACT
Ron Voted AGAINST the Military Commissions Act
Ron Voted AGAINST funding the Iraq war.
Ron Voted AGAINST the REAL ID ACT (National ID Card)
Yes, I can see how he supported this administration, sorry.
With the SOLE exception for the war President Bush is by far the MOST LIBERAL REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE US.
The Republican party left us we didn't leave the republican party.
Ron Paul and his adherence to the Constitution, his long tenure without scandals, and his distinguished and admirable voting record is more than enough to have earned a fair chance for the seat as POTUS.
Hes the ONLY genuine candidate. Rudy is a one-trick socialist pony republican. He will redistribute wealth through social programs, he will destroy the second Admenedment, he will add to the constitution Civil Unions, He will open the borders like they have in New York offering drivers linceses to Illegal aliens.
Romney has flip flopped on absolutely EVERY ISSUE over his entire career. He has gone back on forth on some many issues so many times he can't even recall his positions.
Thompson has a 40 year hiatus from politics. He wants to continue the course like President Bush. 80% of America wants us out of IRAQ- DO YOU REALLY THINK THOMPSON HAS A CHANCE!
McCain by all accounts is practically bankrupt, both morally and financially he wont be able to continue much longer.
Brownback dropped out already
Hucklebee will too.
The only viable candidate that can keep a democratic house and senate (it will happen folks dont think it wont) in check is Ron Paul and his power to veto, runaway spending, taxation, amnesty to illegal aliens, bring our troops home honorably, loser taxes, change all these ridiculous trade laws that are slanted against the US.
I voted for Bush both times. I am through voting the lesser of the two evils- Its time we got some fresh blood in the White House and send a message that we aren't putting up with their crap anymore.
They lie they cheat, they STEAL.
Ron Paul isn't a Politicians he's the last of the STATESMEN!
RON PAUL 08'
Also, unlike all the other Republican candidates, Ron Paul *does not* stand behind the Bush administration. He criticizes the original decision to enter Iraq, and he criticizes the continuing decision to remain there.
Do you think party is more important than the message? I'm not a Republican, but I support him. The beliefs of the party members also vary by geography. The average Texas Republican is different than one from Oregon.
The fact is, until we give alternative parties equal access to the process, the dominant parties have the edge. I don't find your objection to be valid.
The countrys health is poor, it needs a doctor not another ambulance chasing lawyer like Rudy, Hillary, of Edwards.
They don't serve us they serve themselves, and the media is sleeping with them.
WAKE UP AMERICA. WE NEED TO DESTROY OUR ENEMY ECONOMICALLY- CHINA IS ON OUR HEELS. WE HAVE AMASSED SO MUCH DEBT IT UNREAL 9 TRILLION DOLLARS.
Take a serious look at Ron Paul.
IRAQ -AFGHAN Veteran here...
Ron Paul 08'
The only way NOT to stand behind an administration like that is to NOT be in either the Republican or Democratic party. Because both have great recent records of 'countless failures.' And where does that leave you? Nowhere, because third party candidates cannot get elected.
Hilary Clinton may stand behind Bush, but Ron Paul does not. He has been criticizing Bush's current policy since Bush was a drunk loser (before Bush entered politics).
If you don't think criticizing and voting against Bush is opposition, and going away to be ignore is. Then I'm sorry, but you need to check yourself into a mental institution because you're delusional and possibly a threat to other human beings.
Please research the Ideals behind the Ron Paul phenomenon.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
Mahatma Gandhi
Find out about Ron Paul for yourself. Visit www.ronpaul2008.com and see why over 51,000 concerned citizens are supporting Dr. Paul for president with their time, energy and money.
Have you not heard a word he's said in the debates? Have you not read any of his articles or books or looked at any of the past legislation he's introduced or votes he's taken?? Do you not know that he is a "REPUBLIC-an" in the truest sense, while also being a Libertarian? He does not "stand behind this administration's countless failures."
For one, a Republican or Democrat is not a lick of difference any more. They differ on a handful of issues, but the reality is on the political spectrum they are very close together.
Secondly, Ron Paul is the ONLY true Republican left. The neocons have taken the party a terrible direction, far from the non-interventionist and fiscally responsible ways of the past. If anything, Bush should be leaving the Republican party.
I urge you to look beyond the labels and simply research this man's many years in congress. It is clear that there has been no complicity in the actions of this administration that Ron Paul has demonstrated. In fact, Ron Paul has been the one railing against the unconstitutional actions of the Administration while the democrats remain silent and while Hilary votes for wars and labels the Iranian military as terrorists.
Do not buy into the left vs right labels in politics. It is simply a tool to distort the real problems we face and allow the encroachment of fascism. Research Ron Paul and allow yourself to transcend these useless labels.
"Ron Paul still hasn’t left the Republican Party"
First off, there shouldn't even be "parties." We don't elect parties, we elect individuals based on their character, integrity, and what they stand for. Ron Paul has the character, he has the integrity, and he stands for upholding our Constitution. Who needs parties?
Second off, since Ron Paul is presently forced to call himself a member of one party or the other, just what party does Mr. Trantow think he should belong to if not the Republican party? Maybe he's mistaking the rest of the supposed Republican candidates as Republican, when in fact Ron Paul is the only true Republican and the rest are imposters.
"Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures." Baloney. Check out his voting record before spouting such gibberish. They don’t call Dr. Paul "Dr. No" for nothing.
"His complicity reveals his true motives." What pray tell then are his "true motives?" It's obvious to me the man is trying to save this once great country, both morally and financially. It's also obvious to me that you Mr. Trantow have not taken the time to check out Ron Paul's stand on the issues.
Let me make it easy for you. Go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/
The current election system is so stacked as to make it completely, and I mean COMPLETELY impossible for anyone to successfully run for president as anything other than a Republican or Democrat. I admit that when I first heard he was running for president, although I knew of his libertarian principles I was still annoyed that he had seemingly "sold out" to one of the deceitful, bought-out major parties. After looking closely at what is all involved in mounting a third party campaign in these times when two parties have a stranglehold on power, I realize that he is right. No wonder the Republican Party leaders are doing their best to squelch his candidacy. This is unprecedented, that someone of unimpeachable character and perfect record of voting according to Constitutional principle do this. To further complicate things for the Republican Party, they know he is the lone voice in the desert of their party that has been right since Day 1 about our going to Iraq, and as much as it's dry and boring to listen to, he's also right that our monetary policy is leading us to lose most of the value of our 401(k)'s by the time we are in our golden years. As he gains in popularity, the attacks will come in greater and greater intensity; for example, NBC aired a report last night that indicated that Ron Paul wants to "abolish" Social Security. It conveniently fails to go into the details that he actually wants to establish a transition over many years to phase it out so that current and near-future recipients, the ones that contributed to it, are able to collect their fair share. Heck, he even opposes the current scheme to tax Social Security benefits. So this report was not only deceitful, it even left out how the current politicians DO want to scam people out of their Social Security.
Ron Paul is brilliant to play the game to win instead of running from behind an eight-ball with absolutely no chance of winning from the start. He is by all accounts squeaky-clean, even though most of us can't say as much. He's been married to the same lovely lady for over 50 years. This man is amazing, and I do not expect to have another chance in my lifetime to vote for someone of this impeccable character. I will cast my vote with great pride for Ron Paul! :)
Having voted against the Iraq war (unlike many (most?) democrats) and his genuine and absolute disapproval of the Patriot Act. His interest in shrinking goverment spending (and voting record to prove it) contrary to the other republicans and democrats. You sir are part of the problem. Get out of the way - speak the truth, learn the truth - or shut up.
EDUCATE YOURSELF!!!
There are different layers of republican. Neo-Conservative and Traditional, Goldwater Republican. Paul is a Goldwater.
He stands seperate on nearly every stance. Party placement for publicity shouldn't count for a nickel.
Also, Ron said he would turn down a Bush nod of approval because it would not help his campaign's message.
Many ask why he is in the Republican party and I would say it is because he is a "traditional" Republican. Less govt, less spending, less foreign involvement. The Neo-cons that are the common Republicans of today are not in line with this style.
Thor
Americans, if you want the government to stay our of your lives and pockets and want to end the needless spending overseas, vote for Ron Paul.
Thats compeletly wrong! He dosent stand behind anuthing the NeoCons stand for not a single thing!
Do your homework!
Ron Paul is actually gaining serious traction in the election and he is getting support from lots of Democrats and independents and well as Republicans. A true peoples candidate. I know one thing the American people are sick and tired of the Bush/Clinton dynasties.
He is the real deal. If you do not believe me look at his record over the last 20 years.
Ron Paul is America's last chance. He wants to abolish the IRS and all income taxes and replace them with NOTHING.
Ron Paul voted against the war. He is still against the war. How is that standing behind this administrations countless failures.
Ron Paul does not advocate torture and has introduced legislation against it. How is that standing behind this administrations countless failures.
Ron Paul wants to abolish the IRS and the Federal Reserve and bring back the value of the dollar. He has wanted to do this for a long time. Bush has done nothing but devalue the dollar. How is that standing behind this administrations countless failures.
Ron Paul wants only to get the federal government out of our lives while this administration is doing everything that it can to invade your privacy. How is that standing behind this administrations countless failures.
Ron Paul has stood up against everyone running against him in the primaries about virtually everything that he stands for. They all want to continue what this administration is doing. Again, how is that standing behind this administrations countless failures?
Running as a Republican has also allowed Ron Paul to sidestep all the third party handicaps that have been put into place to keep us shackled to a two party system. Really, the parties don't matter. They are just another way to keep the people of this country divided. If Ron Paul were a Democrat, I would still vote for him.
This one paragraph article is clearly misleading and could easily be taken as a hit piece. Please do some research before writing propaganda like this, or at least back up what you are saying with facts.
Do you see them being allowed to introduce legislation?
They have convinced a large portion of America that we have a "two party system". He certainly isn't going to run as a Democrat. As for complicity, he has been the most outstanding vocal critic of this administration of any Republican. He has done this with his voice and his votes. GO RON!@
1) Ron Paul belonging in the GOP does not make him complicit in the administration's antics. He has derided just about every decision that Bush has made since he has been in office.
2) He ran as an independent once before - didn't go so well.
He has voted against ALL of BUSH/CHENEY adventurism and bloated excess...
That should tell one all they need to know...
Plus out of ANY candidate running for president this year on either ticket..heck on ANY ticket no American can be SURE of what ANY candidate will do once elected... as they all fall prey to MONEY & POWER..
All of them that is... cept for the good Dr. Ron Paul.. 20yrs AND NEVER CORRUPTED!! works for me!
However, instead of labeling someone by their party affiliation, they should be judged by their actions and voting record. Will they act in your best interest? This applies to any candidate, prior to voting for them.
For me, I am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. Reviewing Dr. Paul's positions, I agree with him on most issues. Changes are drastically needed and he will recieve my vote, regardless of party affiliation.
LG
Of course your one of the SHEEPLE in America that will vote for whoever Media Tells them to. (welcome to war with another third world country for absolutely no reason!)And when someone great come's along who doesn't want a warfare/welfare/police-state, you will call them crazy just as your told to. Now go graze with the rest of the Sheeple while true patiots fight to save what is left of your liberties and the Constitution that you wrongly assume still exist. BAAAHH BAAAAAHH
Google: Ron Paul
WWW. Ron Paul 2008. c o m
Dale in Oklahoma
Ron Paul's true motive is to bring back the constitution and to reinvigorate the old right, who believes in individual liberty and a humble foreign policy. He votes accordingly.
Unfortunately, the election process isn't very democratic today, and as such, it's necessary to be on the bigger ticket. He is NOT accepting of the status quo in washington and the republican party. He has consistently stated that the party has "lost it's way". He's trying to fix the damage they've done to it. This is better than giving up on his conservative roots. He's trying to bring dem's, repub's, lib's, and every other set of ideas to the table for what is best for the country. It's called common sense. It's about time!
Paul did not vote for the "Patriot" Act or the war in Iraq but Clinton did. Is she complicit? Ron Paul is close to the complete opposite of the Bush administration while Clinton is Bush but slightly to the left. With Clinton we still get the war but also health care which is better than just the war I guess except we still have to pay for both. Bush is pro big government Paul is ANTI and he is trying to shape one of the parties because that is really all you can do in the USA. You pick a party in which your voice will resonate loudest and try to get your message heard.
Here is a Youtube video from 2002 Paul outlines exactly how badly things will go in Iraq before we go. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLV7zDhKzDY
Doesn't seem like standing behind Bush to me. The 51m people who voted for Bush again in 2004 are far more complicit than Paul.
I suggest you spend some time researching the candidates from both parties before blindly asserting that the D is some how superior to the R or vice versa.
By the way what are his true motives this sentence made no sense.
In a 2 party system, you have to pick one. Ron Paul is a fiscal conservative, and truly a classical liberal. Think beyond your party, and look at the person/issue.
Why should he leave the Republican party when he is the one that truly stands for limited government and the constitution. Those that don't stand for a limited constitutional government should all be kicked out. And that is what we, Ron Paul supporters, plan to do!
I am glad you see Dr. Paul "as the only one who “makes any sense.” I hope you will support us in our efforts to take back the GOP!
Thanks!
Ron Paul is like the rest of Americans in that he has been forced to choose between republican and democratic parties as to which is a better fit for his/our beliefs. No currently running candidate exactly matches the republican or democrat party line. They differentiate themselves from it to separate themselves from the pack Ron Paul believes more in the republican party at least as it was known as recently as 2000 then any other candiate. He believes in what bush campaigned for smaller government, reductions in taxes, and a constitutional approach.
Ron Paul differs from the pack of republicans and from the democrats where practicality and the constitution decrees that he must. The republican party didn't always possess a complete lack of sense and neither did the democrats.
Aside from the correct definition of Republican, there's a matter of practical significance. Would you suggest Paul run as a Democrat when he's clearly a traditional Republican? Or would you suggest he run as an independent, where the system is biased against him and he has no chance of winning.
Don't you think it's more important to take back a major party from the fringes of hard-Wilsonianism to the libertarian ideals of Barry Goldwater?
And lastly, Paul has never stood behind the President. Rather he has attacked his policies over and over and over. Haven't you listened to anything he's said?
What are you trying to say anyway, it makes no sense. Why does the Denver Post allow people like you to post their illogical pointless opinions?
Paul Trantow's claims have no basis or merit whatsoever.
Ron has refused to agree to support any Republican nominee who continues Bush's disastrous policies. It should be clear from an examination of Ron Paul's 20-year record that he is a man of honor and truth and intelligence.
To insinuate that George W. Bush and his administration personify all that is Republican shows some ignorance- both as to what conservative, traditional Republicanism IS and as to how displeased so many registered longtime Republicans are and have been with this administration. To take the position that anyone registered as a Republican stands by and approves of the actions of any other Republican is simply ridiculous.
By this logic, Barack Obama approves of and "stands behind" Senator Robert Byrd who is a former klansman...and he must "stand behind" the blatantly racist and segregationist policies of Democrats in the 50s and 60s. Frankly I dont think Obama has a framed picture of George Wallace on his wall unless its to throw darts at.
Ron Paul has vehemently opposed from the beginning the Iraq war, big-government, drug prohibition, runaway fiat currency and central banks, subsidizing, lobbyist pandering, and the like. This sets him apart from the current media-favorite so-called "Republicans"- who have traditionally been against most of the aforementioned policies. Would you rather he register as a Democrat...even though his policies are WILDLY out of step with the current norm of THAT party as well?
Focus on the candidates and the issues, not the almost completely irrelevant parties.
He is openly and directly hostile to many of the administrations policies. In fact, he just introduced a bill the other day that would repeal much of what the neocons have done. He's simply trying to unseat them and return the party to its roots.
Ron Paul cannot run as a third party candidate. Our system gives third parties no chance whatsoever.
Ron Paul cannot run as a Democrat, because he is a traditional conservative.
The only choice for him is the Republican party. If the poster had actually bothered to listen to Ron Paul speak about the issue on numerous occasions... his view is that the party has been hijacked by neo-conservatives. He would like to return the party to its traditional roots.
In other words... the Republican party itself has never been the problem. The neo-cons have been.
What does Mr. Trantow suggest Ron Paul do in order to have a viable shot at the presidency? I see no other reasonable course for him to take.
Um What? Ron paul voted against the war in Iraq from the beginning. He voted against continuing funding the war.
Please do tell which failed bush policies Paul continues to support?
www RonPaul2008 com
Thanks for reading my long post.
No, Dr Paul, hasn't left the Republican Party--the other candidates did and stole the Party's name on their way out.
The past 10 years I have seen the partisan divide get ever wider. In the mean-time, the power has only shifted back and forth between the parties to support one group of socialite environmentalists with their hands out on the left and another group of corporate oil-hungry monopolists with their hands out on the right. When I started hearing libertarian candidates say that the war was just because of the Jihad against America, I knew that the only way they would ever be able to compete at a national level is to start sounding 'mainstream'. I think we're finding that Ron Paul's adherence to the constitution and his desire to return the country's power back to the people is a lot more mainstream that anyone at the heads of either party would like to admit!
That's right. He is one of the very few true conservatives left in Congress. The fact that he hasn't left despite what has been done to the party's image is admirable. If anyone should have left the Republican Party- it's GWB and the rest of the NeoCons.
"Ron Paul has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures. His complicity reveals his true motives."
That's a very untrue statement. Ron Paul has voted against the official party line on countless occasions. Ever heard of Dr. No? He is the poster boy for non-complicity and way of principles, which incidentaly is the main reason for his wild popularity. Especially when you contrast his congressional record with that of his colleagues and their sub-20% approval rating.
Ron Paul voted against: the Patriot Act, the war in Iraq, the Military Commissions Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, to name just a few. Ron Paul wants to bring the troops home now, phase out Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in favor of private alternatives, get rid of the Federal Reserve and its inflationary counterfeiting, repeal the 16th Amendment to get rid of both the federal income tax and the IRS, and put an end to the departments of education and agriculture, among others.
In light of that, Trantow's final sentence, "His complicity reveals his true motives", is sheer nonsense.
Ken Sturzenacker, Bethlehem, PA
Do some simple research before putting out such garbage.
If we're going to start attacking candidates for the political party they're trying to save, why not implicate Dennis Kucinich for Nancy Pelosi's abysmal job performance and her blocking of impeachment proceedings. Doesn't make much sense does it?
Ron Paul's choice to stay with the Republican Party as a congressman and candidate reveals that he is a pragmatic person. He knows the system has been rigged by the duopoly parites, and the only way for his voice to be heard is to represent one of them. They are nothing but two sides of the same coin.
If you want proof that he is against everything the neo cons have done you need to look no further then his voting record. He voted against the Iraq war from the start.
You need to get out of this republican vs democrat mind set. Because there are democrats just as idiotic and dangerious for our country as a lot of the republicans. Please research the individuals not the party and vote for the individual and not the party. I generally vote democrat but in times like these I do not think any of the democrats are suitable. I am voting Ron Paul to balance our budget and get us the hell out of war. The top tier democrats can't even commit to bringing our troops home by 2013. That is unacceptable to me!
Ron Paul will bring them home NOW. Vote Ron Paul for Peace.
What a bogus leap of logic. Ron Paui us the only true Republican left. All the others are sock puppets for the oligarchy.
That was a nasty attemptr to smear the one man who steadfastly keeps his oath to uphold and protrect the Constitution. Was that ignorance or deceit?
Paul Trantow, you either a liar oir abysmally ignorant. Which is it? What you wrote has nothing to do with Ron Paul. I should know, I've known about Ron Paul since at least 1985.
www.youtube.com/JiveDadson
First of all, Paul's voting record and decades worth of unchanging principled views prove your statement is wrong.
He has denounced this administration's countless failures publicly in almost every debate, and his remaining in the Party is simply a move to try and get it back from neo-conservative views which have infected it.
We are not (and never have been) a democracy. We are a Republic, and it's time we elect people who vote for the positions they campaigned on. It's also time they acted on why we put them there. Paul has done this. Has any other ?
I'm not quite sure how him being "guilty by association' reveals his true motives.
In fact his true motives can be found here-
www.ronpaul2008.com/issues
Paul in 08!
He's raised more money from people in the military than any other candidate. Why? Because real support for the military isn't just mission accomplishment. It's troop welfare. I've seen the purple thumbs from the Iraqi voters on TV. They've voted now let's get our sons and daughters out of there!
How is him being a Republican standing by the current administration anyhow? He voted against the Iraq War and the Patriot Act. Besides, it looks to me that the Democrat party supports the war now being that none of their major candidates are saying we need to leave Iraq now.
I can understand your animosity towards Republicans. It just seems that the whole system has been screwed up for a long time now and pointing a finger at one part of the system may be missing the bigger picture.
His true motives? Give me a break.
RonPaul2008.com
Ron Paul is Totally against the administration's foriegn policy (Iraq, Iran, etc etc) and Spending policy.
Why do you think the "Mainstream" Repubs dislike Ron Paul?
This post is a disgusting, dispicable attemp to smear Ron Paul.
You Sir, should be ashamed!
Ron Paul is about as far from president Bush's policies as humanly possible. Here is a short list why:
The man voted against the "Patriot" Act from day one. Voted AGAINST the war from day one and advises against such undeclared, endless wars and usurpations of power by the executive branch. He voted against the Military Commissions Act that destroyed the last vestiges of habeas corpus. He wants a complete overhaul of U.S. foreign policy. He wants to abolish the IRS and repeal the 16th Amendment to eliminate income taxes (something that would ensure that our misguided and bloated federal government never gets us into another ludicrous MULTI-TRILLION DOLLAR foreign war under false pretenses again). He constantly blasts the Bush administration on their criticism of war protesters as being somehow "unpatriotic". He wants to restore sound money policies to the United States by eliminating the counterfeit "Federal" Reserve and kicking the private central bankers out of Washington - the same way Andrew Jackson did in his day.
This man, Ron Paul is about the closest thing to a founding father this day and age has got. The man is simply IMPECCABLE in his Constitutional voting record and is peerless in politics. He is one of the last of a dying breed of honest men in political office, a trend his campaign is helping to reverse.
To say he is ANYTHING like the unconstitutional NIGHTMARE that has been the Bush Administration is a total misunderstanding of Ron Paul and politics in general. It's the same as saying that Thomas Jefferson was like Mao Tse-Tung. It tells me that whoever wrote this little quote probably gets all their information from cable television, and likewise probably doesn't understand why that's a BAD thing.
If you look at his voting record in congress he is against Bush not with him.
Unfortunately, there are only two parties that have a chance at this time. I hope that changes. If he leaves the Republican Party the news media will not cover him and nobody would hear his message. It is hard enough for him as a Republican.
All of the other candidates, including the Democrats, are more commplicit with the present administration than Dr. Paul.
No he hasn't. No it doesn't.
He has done nothing but criticize and vote against the admisnistration and explained countless times that a) his positions (liberty, property, peace, small government) are what the Republican party used to support and b) running outside of the two-party scam would have kept him out of the debates.
It is always best to do a little reading and thinking before engaging in writing.
Iraq, Iran, Open borders, the Drug War, the Federal Reserve system, the IRS, THE PATRIOT ACT, the REAL ID. Is that enough to show that he doesn't support our current president? I would love to hear some examples of when he does what you claim.
Some might say "If you don't like what's going on, simply leave" Well, Ron Paul has chosen to stay in the party to fight for the ideals and beliefs we as "True" Republicans believe in. What is so God awful hard to understand? Do you want to return to our former glory or don't you?
It is time to put your great rhetoric into some tangible effort to ellect an incredibly gutsy guy who is laying it all on the line for you and me.
Your suggestion that Ron Paul is an accomplice of the Bush administration is ridiculous. A quick look at the man's voting record in Congress, a brief look at his website www.RonPaul2008.com, or any research at all would show that this is the farthest thing from the truth. The truth is that Ron Paul is adamantly opposed to, not supportive of, the Bush administration. Ron Paul voted against the war at its inception. Ron Paul opposes the expansion of government that has occurred under this administration, witness The No Child Left Behind Act and Ron Paul's opposition to it. I invite you to do this simple research and be more responsible in the future if you continue to publish writings online. Ron Paul is still a Republican and indeed is the best the party has to offer, not because he stands with Bush but rather because he stands against him.
- Rick
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about/
Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
I am a former Air Force officer and pilot -- and I support Dr. Ron Paul and believe he is the best hope for America!
There will be a rally at 1:30-2:30 (open to all) and a fundraiser 3-5pm.
Dr. Paul is a Champion of the Constitution and defends our civil liberties!
Be a part of it today and let's restore this great Republic!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/events/wyoming-fundr...
So you are implying that the Republican Party is some how responsible for anything that any member does?
So if there is a serial killer that is in the Democratic party every member of that party is now in collusion?
Give me a break man, This is faulty logic at best. A slander piece at worst.
If you do feel the need to invoke Ron Paul on your website to increase your traffic for the day. Try to keep the slander at a minimum.
Fact. Ron Paul has not chosen to stand behind the administrations positions on many things. Including but not limited to.
1. The Iraq war.
2. The military commissions act.
3. The patriot act.
4. Warrantless Wiretapping.
These 4 listed above are the most egregious examples of fascist misuse of power and the corruption of the constitution.
Thanks
See the REAL Republican party was actually not a bad ideology to follow. The were strong on defence but kept big government out of peoples personal lives. They were fiscally responsible and worked hard to keep up forign relation arround the world.
Ron Paul is a REAL Republican.
Ron Paul dosen't need to leave the Republican party...it left him.
"... has chosen to stand behind this administration’s countless failures."
Paul Trantow is incorrect. Ron Paul forcefully rejected the white house policy on Iraq.
Please read Ron Paul's speech he gave in Congress in 2002 before the rest of the Congress voted to go into Iraq. http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/c...
That's right, Ron Paul voted against going to Iraq while Hillary Clinton voted for going to Iraq.
If he was truly a man of principal he would have accepted Bob Barr's invitation to run as Libertarian Party. He declined to do so and threw his support behind a right wing religious nut job in the form of Chuck Baldwin.
As long as the 3rd parties remain divided and quarelling amongst themselves, no progress in breaking up the vicious duopoloy will ever be made.