Quantcast

Ron Paul's 15 Most Extreme Positions As if being too old, too ugly, too racist and two bigoted were not enough, he's too wacky for majority of Americans.

ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2011/12/31 22:15:42





Ron Paul's 15 Most Extreme Positions










Could Rep. Ron Paul of Texas ever be a true contender for the White House?


To be sure, the conservative political landscape has shifted
dramatically since Paul's quixotic bid for the 2008 GOP nomination was
met by jeers from the party establishment, and the Ron Paul Revolution
has minted a new generation of libertarian activists
who've helped lay some of the organizational and ideological groundwork
for the tea party movement. "Time has come around to where people are
agreeing with much of what I've been saying for 30 years," the Texas
congressman said on Friday, as he launched his third White House
attempt. "The time is right."


Yet despite Paul's growing cult following, many of his views are just
a tad extreme for voters from either major party. To name just a few of
these politically dicey positions, President Ron Paul would like to...


1. Eviscerate Entitlements: Believes that Social
Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unconstitutional, and has compared
the failure of federal courts to strike them down to the courts' failure to abolish slavery in the 19th century.


2. Lay Off Half His Cabinet: Wants to abolish half of all federal agencies, including the departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor.


3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.


4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against
requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of
child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the
government.


5. Rescind the Bin Laden Raid: Instead of authorizing the Navy Seals to take him out, President Paul would have sought Pakistan's cooperation to arrest him.


6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.


7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.


8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.


9. Keep Monopolies Intact: Opposes federal antitrust legislation,
calling it "much more harmful than helpful." Thinks that monopolies can
be controlled by protecting "the concept of the voluntary contract."


10. Lay Off Ben Bernanke: Would abolish the Federal Reserve and revert to use of currencies that are backed by hard assets such as gold.


11. Stop Policing the Environment: Believes that climate change is no big deal and the Environmental Protection Agency is unnecessary.
Most environmental problems can be addressed by enforcing
private-property rights. Paul also thinks that interstate issues such as
air pollution are best dealt with through compacts between states.


12. Not Do Anything, but Still...: Would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."


13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.


14. First, Do Harm: Wants to end birthright citizenship. Believes that emergency rooms should have the right to turn away illegal immigrants.


15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Classical Liberal 2012/01/01 00:14:46 (edited)
    Classical Liberal
    +12
    so the majority of Paul's extreme positions are... the constitution?

    Well I suppose that is extreme considering everyone else to hold elected federal office for the past half-century or so has treated it like toilet paper and kept getting re-elected anyway.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Tony ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/01/04 22:59:50
    Tony ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    Your ignorance is astounding.

    ron paul freedom
  • John "By God" American 2012/01/02 11:20:47
    John "By God" American
    +3
    You're living proof Ron White was absolutely right...
  • Wake The Sheeple 2012/01/02 01:09:33
    Wake The Sheeple
    +5
    Why do you care so much when you live in British territory?...

    Is him getting in office going to put your wealth at risk?...
  • debadow 2012/01/01 21:08:13
    debadow
    +7
    For Freedom And The Constitution ron paul 2012 ron paul 2012 ron paul 2012 ron paul 2012
  • TelFiRE 2012/01/01 14:34:36 (edited)
    TelFiRE
    +11
    "too old, too ugly, too racist and two bigoted" ... I hope you realize the complete and total hypocrisy you demonstrate.

    1. False, these things would not be taken away from those who already pay into them. People would simply be able to opt out. So you are just anti-freedom.

    2. Yes, he does. Care to explain why spending less money is a bad thing, when we currently owe more per year on interest alone than we can possibly pay back, when all these departments do is limit our freedom?

    3. Yes, that is how our country and Constitution work. That is called freedom. What is the difference between the state and the U.S. government? There are extremists in both. The difference is when one does something wrong, it ruins things for the entire country and even affects the world. When a state does something wrong, it only affects that state and possibly those around it to a small degree. On the other hand when something goes right, other states will notice the effects and follow suit. That's how it worked for a long time, and by relegating too much power to the federal gov you are claiming you do not believe in anything our founding fathers talked about. You are being anti-freedom.

    4. In order to find out that they are looking at child porn, you have to spy on them to begin with. You can't just...



























    "too old, too ugly, too racist and two bigoted" ... I hope you realize the complete and total hypocrisy you demonstrate.

    1. False, these things would not be taken away from those who already pay into them. People would simply be able to opt out. So you are just anti-freedom.

    2. Yes, he does. Care to explain why spending less money is a bad thing, when we currently owe more per year on interest alone than we can possibly pay back, when all these departments do is limit our freedom?

    3. Yes, that is how our country and Constitution work. That is called freedom. What is the difference between the state and the U.S. government? There are extremists in both. The difference is when one does something wrong, it ruins things for the entire country and even affects the world. When a state does something wrong, it only affects that state and possibly those around it to a small degree. On the other hand when something goes right, other states will notice the effects and follow suit. That's how it worked for a long time, and by relegating too much power to the federal gov you are claiming you do not believe in anything our founding fathers talked about. You are being anti-freedom.

    4. In order to find out that they are looking at child porn, you have to spy on them to begin with. You can't just magically go straight to only the pervert's computer. If you support this at all, you are supporting a complete and total destruction to our right to privacy. Yet again, you are just being anti-freedom.

    5. Nice try, but this is a straight up lie. Ron Paul voted to go after Bin Laden. There is no such thing as "rescinding" an action in this world. It already happened. Under Paul, it would have happened much, MUCH sooner. Regardless this whole situation is entirely hypothetical since he was not the one who made the decision, and we should not use hypotheticals with no basis in reality to pick our president.

    6. Yeah, again, right to privacy. You either believe in it or you don't and this is a clear cut issue. I guess you just hate freedom.

    7. This is a good idea. When we legalized alcohol, the death rate associated with it went down, and the crime associated with it went down. Just making something illegal does not mean people stop it, or even that necessarily less people do it (case in point: speed limit). It just means that the people who do it will be outlaws, most likely the thug type. It just means that people who do it will be introduced to the entire outlaw world when they otherwise may not have. There's really no good argument for having this illegal, it comes down to whether or not you believe in... *gasp* ... FREEDOM.

    8. See above, the arguments are pretty much identical. There is no good reason to outlaw a substance. Would you make poison ivy illegal? No. Let people make their own decisions, be they stupid or otherwise. The more we clench our fists on this group, the more slip through the cracks.

    9. No, the monopolies are far more protected under current law. You should stop taking his positions at face value. The entire system is set up to make you think it's working for you, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that the way to fix it may *look* bad at first glance. The reality is, the antitrust laws help large corporations who can afford the lawyers to enforce them. There are TONS of regulations on book keeping the little guy down that Ron Paul wants to repeal. Ron Paul is not only not a corporatist, he is far and away the most anti-corporatist candidate.

    10. He isn't going to just end the fed point blank. He wants to audit it, and then phase it out. Printing money causes inflation, it is bad. It does not work, and it is impossible to control someone who has that power. There certainly should not be a GOVERNMENT, yet NON-ELECTED organization that completely controls our economy. They have total control over it! They can squeeze it for elections, print a bunch to make it look good for a bit. But ALL of their actions have negative impact on the economy. This is quite a full argument to itself, and I will admit one of the only points on your whole list that is actually debatable and not just a misconception. But Ron Paul does know his economics, and the idea that you, a simpleton who can't even research most of Ron Paul's positions correctly, would happen to know how to fix our economy when no one in history has had much success in economics, is absurd.

    11. EPA is unnecessary, that does not mean he would legalize pollution. Obviously, when you pollute, you infringe on other peoples' property rights, and Paul is vehemently for property rights. Just because he would do away with the wasteful and ineffective EPA does not mean any of the things you insinuate.

    12. He would have voted against the Jim Crow laws through alternative legislation, or written it himself if he had to. The Civil Rights act itself, while widely lauded, did more harm than good. You have to understand, "The Civil Rights Act" is not a piece of paper that says "people can't be racist". It's a large piece of legislation with a LOT going on, most of which has nothing to do directly with civil rights or racism. Unless you've read the whole thing, you have no place saying Ron Paul shouldn't have voted against it. You don't know what's hidden in there. In the end it was actually quite harmful in a lot of ways to the cause of equality of opportunity.

    13. He's voting for freedom. People have rights. There's no authority to force them to do things other than to stop them from infringing on those same rights of others. You act like "the market" is comprised of a bunch of evil greedy corporatists. That's not the case. YOU AND ME are "the market". And the idea that we can't do certain things without government is absurd, when government itself is just our creation.

    14. Yeah, it's a highly debatable issue, but he also isn't going to deport them simply because they're not a citizen. And he wants to create more paths to citizenship. So, I mean this is not really an extreme position by any means, there are all sorts of positions about this topic and personally I don't see it as one of the major issues right now.

    15. $30,000 for a medal for a religious leader paid for by tax dollars! Yes it's too expensive!!!! That could pay for a person on the street to live comfortably for 2 or more YEARS! Mother Theresa should be ashamed to even accept it, unless she plans on ebaying it and putting it to just that purpose.

    Freedom and personal liberty are concepts you clearly do not understand. The idea is not to have anarchy, the idea is to have a society where people are able to do what they want to do as long as they don't hurt other people. There is no reason to be prosecuting people for victimless crimes. It is wrong that over half of our prisoners are completely nonviolent offenders.

    Government is just another company, but worse in ways because it is not subject to the same limitations, and it does not have the same motivation. Almost everything it does is less efficient and comes out worse than when a company does it. To protect our liberty is its only purpose, for everything else the people you make out to be so evil -- "the market" -- will do a much better job in fact.

    Ron Paul is the only person who will bring reason to this country and world.
    (more)
  • debadow TelFiRE 2012/01/01 21:09:53
    debadow
    +5
    Some People don't know the meaning of freedom
  • Jennifer TelFiRE 2012/01/02 18:09:07
    Jennifer
    I like you :O)
  • DeeB 2012/01/01 13:17:13
    DeeB
    +6
    What does any American truly care what a loser from the Caymen Islands thinks? They probably only vote for more corruption because they are nothing but money launderers. They don't want things in America to change because they will lose!! So go slander your own politicians. Ron Paul is the best thing to happen to this country and all of the people are waking up to that fact. RON PAUL 2012!
  • debadow DeeB 2012/01/01 21:10:20
    debadow
    +3
    NONE OF US DO
  • irish 2012/01/01 12:52:12
    irish
    +6
    my my my, when in fear of reality , libel and slander are in order by some . better watch out,you can be held accountable for misrepresenting a person and holding them up to ridicule.

    this user is a sock puppet! imposter among us
  • "Shooter" ™ 2012/01/01 03:46:57
    "Shooter" ™
    +1
    And thank God that he is not going to win the nomination!!

    Excellent post!!!
  • Nightmusic 2012/01/01 01:53:09 (edited)
    Nightmusic
    +3
    He sounds like an extreme libertarian. Really it doesn't sound that bad. It's bad that wi-fi operators who pick up child porn don't have to report it, but on the other hand if people went back to being more self-sufficient like they used to be, incompetent idiots would not be subsidized to have babies and the overall rate of child abuse would probably go down.
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ Nightmusic 2012/01/01 01:58:04
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    That kind of think is just too simplistic.
  • Technotrucker_exposingthetruth 2012/01/01 01:15:22
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +8
    Every single statement in this biased hate filled poll has been disputed and proven wrong, except in cases that were subject to Constitutional authority. Up to and including anything that would be a direct cost to the taxpayer. You are a hate mongerer and I am sure the Obama campaign is very thankful of your left wing communist approach. Good job.
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ Technot... 2012/01/01 01:38:57
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    +1
    You obviously believe only what you want to believe. Not the truth.
  • Technot... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 01:45:49
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +8
    Not YOUR version of the truth, absolutely not. LMAO! You people are a laugh riot.
    I bet you believe that nobody sees through your mask either. LMAO! 0bie must be really proud of your efforts. LMAO!
  • rob ☮ R... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 22:21:19
    rob ☮ RP ☮ 2012 ☮
    +4
    and you still believe in obama. i know who lives in a dream world
  • rob ☮ RP ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/01/01 01:14:04
    rob ☮ RP ☮ 2012 ☮
    +10
    hell i say just elect a war dog and send them to the corrupt Cayman islands , we can confiscate all the laundered money we can use it to pay down the debt , as always take no prisoners , find ὤTṻnde΄ӂ and use enhanced interrogation technique's to the whole family . we can start a new debt reduction program by offering pay per view to watch.
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ rob ☮ R... 2012/01/01 01:39:29
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    I can tell by your first line that you believe everything you read. Gullible.
  • John "B... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/02 11:28:40
    John "By God" American
    +1
    said the mindless sycophant...
  • debadow rob ☮ R... 2012/01/01 21:11:46
    debadow
    +4
    Works for Me!
  • Tink123 2012/01/01 00:57:12 (edited)
    Tink123
    +8
    Still flinging poop at the wall, eh?

    Wow. This blog is so chocked full of logical fallacy. I assume its length is intended to discourage any sort of meaningful dialogue. But I'll give you one for free. lol

    1.
    Entitlement is just another word for "govt. dependency." And it is completely fallacious to insinuate that the intended purpose of entitlements is to "help" those struggling.

    Subsidies only ever prove to produce surpluses and it's just not right to entice people into govt. dependency under the false pretense of helping them. The result - entire generations of unnecessarily subservient citizens. Govt. dependency doesn't help them - it subjugates them. Why would we ever want to expand dependency when we could foster personal independence?

    Our Founders agreed...

    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, I observed in different countries that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves and became richer."
    --Ben Franklin (November 27-29 1766)

    That statement might have been meaningless were it made by anyone other than Be...




    Still flinging poop at the wall, eh?

    Wow. This blog is so chocked full of logical fallacy. I assume its length is intended to discourage any sort of meaningful dialogue. But I'll give you one for free. lol

    1.
    Entitlement is just another word for "govt. dependency." And it is completely fallacious to insinuate that the intended purpose of entitlements is to "help" those struggling.

    Subsidies only ever prove to produce surpluses and it's just not right to entice people into govt. dependency under the false pretense of helping them. The result - entire generations of unnecessarily subservient citizens. Govt. dependency doesn't help them - it subjugates them. Why would we ever want to expand dependency when we could foster personal independence?

    Our Founders agreed...

    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, I observed in different countries that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves and became richer."
    --Ben Franklin (November 27-29 1766)

    That statement might have been meaningless were it made by anyone other than Ben Franklin. A man who was arguably the single most selfless individual to have participated in our Founding. This is a man who invented things which could have made him filthy rich and just gave them away to people with no expectation of anything in return. A man responsible for the first hospital, the first fire dept. (which was VOLUNTARY), the first library, the first militia. If even someone as blindly generous and compassionate as Ben Franklin could see the fatal flaw in subsidization - we'd serve ourselves well to heed his words.

    On the question of Constitutionality, heed these.

    "With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
    --James Madison
    (more)
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ Tink123 2012/01/01 01:03:00
  • Tink123 ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 01:11:11 (edited)
  • Classical Liberal 2012/01/01 00:14:46 (edited)
    Classical Liberal
    +12
    so the majority of Paul's extreme positions are... the constitution?

    Well I suppose that is extreme considering everyone else to hold elected federal office for the past half-century or so has treated it like toilet paper and kept getting re-elected anyway.
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ Classic... 2012/01/01 00:22:12
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    No. Not the constitution as it has been interpreted for well over 200 years. It really doesn't matter, he's going NO WHERE.
  • Classic... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 00:23:12
    Classical Liberal
    +6
    I advise you to look at the polls.
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ Classic... 2012/01/01 00:44:08
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    You need to look at the Intrade Prediction Market that has proved to be more reliable than any poll. Romney has a 77.2% of being the nominee, Ron Paul has a 3.3% chance. http://fwd4.me/0jPS
    BTW Paul running 2nd in Iowa is irrelevant.
  • Classic... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 03:20:16 (edited)
  • Classic... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 00:27:28
    Classical Liberal
    +7
    wait. You're the politically, historically, and economically ignorant leftist that tried and epically failed to make a legitimate case that capitalism is fascism earlier.

    So now you've taken to attacking the only non-fascist currently running for president in one of the major parties, based solely on the same ignorance of real-world politics and history as that previous failure.

    No wonder this question is so bigoted.
  • tlee ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 02:27:13
    tlee
    +1
    where can i find in our founding documents where anyone is given the authority to interpret? we are either a nation of law or of men!.
  • The Bantam Seditioner 2011/12/31 23:41:48
    The Bantam Seditioner
    +12
    What a caustic and mean-spirited question this is.

    You blast Ron Paul for his alleged bigotry, yet you call him old and ugly. Even if you were talking about a politician who I didn't support, I would call you to task for this, because it is so counterproductive to the purpose and the spirit of American politics, not to mention completely unnecessary and disrespectful.
  • ConLibF... The Ban... 2011/12/31 23:58:53
    ConLibFraud
    +10
    There's a lot of hate here on SH.
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ ConLibF... 2012/01/01 00:23:37
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    I know, republican/teabaggers are nothing but hate and racism.
  • ConLibF... ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 00:32:38
    ConLibFraud
    +10
    That is a mouth full. Yes, there is no difference between repubs and tea partiers and they have a lot in common with libs ....
    - They are full of hate and racism (per your admission).
    - They believe a party is the answer.
    - They think an election will save them.
    - They believe the lies and propaganda from the government/media.
    - They spit on truth and facts.
    - They have biased opinions.
    - They think the constitution is something to wipe their feet on.
  • Tink123 ConLibF... 2012/01/01 01:08:57
    Tink123
    +7
    Even the puppet hands applaud that one!
    puppet hands applaud
  • ConLibF... Tink123 2012/01/01 03:06:45
    ConLibFraud
    +5
    Happy New Year my Friend!
  • Tink123 ConLibF... 2012/01/01 03:40:08
    Tink123
    +5
    Same to you and yours. May it bring a path to solvency for all. =)
  • ὤTṻnde΄ӂ The Ban... 2012/01/01 00:23:07
    ὤTṻnde΄ӂ
    You obviously don't know what a huge number of Americans consider when choosing a president.
  • tlee ὤTṻnde΄ӂ 2012/01/01 02:29:06
    tlee
    +2
    looks and ability to read a teleprompter is about the extent of it

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/25 00:53:45

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals