Saturday, July 9, 2011

5 Reasons Progressives Should Join the Ron Paul Revolution

Image source
Eric Blair
Activist Post

There aren't many people still calling Ron Paul's ideas radical.  In fact, his credibility in the eyes of many has only been fortified since his 2008 candidacy due to his consistently accurate analysis. His 2012 presidential campaign is in full swing, armed with a formidable war chest, impressive straw poll victories, and the same resonating message of peace and liberty. Yet, he has been completely ignored by the progressive media.

It almost seems as though the progressive media chooses the Republican challenger by simply reporting on the people they love to hate. They exhaustively write about Romney and Bachmann, clearly casting them as the prime targets. They use their precious news space to endlessly speculate about Sarah Palin and Rick Perry who aren't even in the race yet. And, once again, they seem to be distracting their readers with mundane mind-numbing drivel and typical wedge issues instead of real issues. But they don't have enough ink to cover Ron Paul?

Perhaps the reason they avoid discussing Ron Paul is that many progressives may find his message appealing, and you can't have that from a guy with an "R" after his name.  If progressives were principled enough to cast aside labels, they would likely find Paul to be the candidate most suited to fulfill their concerns.

Here are five reasons progressives should support Ron Paul for president in 2012:

1. Peace: If you're a progressive whose main issue is ending our imperial wars, there is simply only one candidate to support, and that's Ron Paul. Indeed, Paul has gained much respect from anti-war liberals for his consistent stance against preemptive wars, permanent occupations, and torture. Certainly no other Republican candidate can claim credibility should they come out against foreign military action. And if progressives can't tell by now that the Nobel Peace-wielding president with a "D" after his name is a fraud in terms of ending the illegal and immoral wars, detention, and torture, then the audacity of hypocrisy will surely win the day.

Obama's unconstitutional, preemptive resource war in Libya is no different (and maybe worse) than Bush's conquests.  It causes a principled observer to vomit at the sight of progressives supporting Obama's Libya assault, not to mention the five other sovereign nations where he continues to murder and displace civilians.  The consequences of the perpetual war state that Paul warned about over a decade ago are just beginning to surface and will eventually be obvious to all. Ron Paul is the only candidate who has properly assessed the wars from the beginning and who is committed to ending them, as well as foreign military aid. Therefore, he is the only logical choice for anti-war voters.

2. Civil Liberties: Despite Obama's intoxicating rhetoric during the 2008 campaign about curbing the war on drugs, he not only continues to crack down on lawful medical marijuana patients, but even secretly arms Mexican drug gangs -- as if to feed an immortal monster that must continuously be slayed.  Additionally, Obama's regime, in a direct assault to health-conscious citizens, has expanded the drug war to other natural products like raw milk and vitamins and supplements. In fact, armed federal agents and SWAT teams have been used in tyrannical raids of peaceful farmers and private food cooperatives.

Furthermore, Obama's administration has unabashedly expanded the unconstitutional surveillance state that he railed against in his first presidential campaign.  The Fourth Amendment right to privacy is all but dead and many progressives readily admit that America is becoming a police state. Yet, the PATRIOT Act, once deplored by the left, was extended for four more years via Obama's virtual signature with no new privacy protections or meaningful debate.  All while most progressives and all establishment Democrats remained silent. Ron Paul has introduced legislation to end federal prohibition of marijuana, to end the abuses of the TSA, and to decriminalize raw milk. It couldn't be more clear which candidate will fight for your liberties.

3. Economy: The real political debate about the economy is not about unions, taxes, or the budget cuts; it's about a living wage. When progressives support unions, they support them because workers are paid a living wage with humane benefits. And opponents of public unions are typically bitter because taxes are extracted from their modest living wages to pay for public workers benefits, while they are now forced by law to purchase impossibly-expensive private health insurance. If the debate was focused on what the primary threat to a living wage is, then Ron Paul would be the clear choice for economy voters. Inflation, which Paul has been warning about for decades, is the biggest enemy to the middle class and the poor.  It's also the main reason companies can't afford to give raises or hire new people.

It was reported this week that food is up 39% this year, while gas prices are up nearly 20%. Whose middle-class income has increased by that much this year? Crucially, every single dollar of deficit spending, even if to help the poor, affects each and every person directly through cost-of-living increases across the board. That is vital to understand for progressives that care about the poor, who are clearly hit the hardest when the price of essentials rise. And deficit spending has a limit, eventually.  When the day of reckoning comes, we'll likely pine for the days of food increasing by only forty-percent every six months. Monetary policy is the culprit to economic imbalance; everything else is a distraction.  In other words, the economy will never be fixed until monetary policy is addressed no matter how many adjustments are made.  Ron Paul, Chairman of the House Committee on Domestic Monetary Policy, is by far the most qualified candidate to transition to a new, sound monetary system.

4. Healthcare:  This is probably the biggest hurdle for Ron Paul to win over progressives.  Liberals who support single-payer government healthcare were brazenly betrayed by Obama during healthcare reform.  The massive new bill did absolutely nothing to expand affordable coverage and only served to bolster the private insurance-big pharma cartel that progressives love to hate. Admittedly, Ron Paul doesn't support a single-payer healthcare, mainly because he believes that would just swap out a private cartel for a public monopoly -- both of which will naturally limit patients' options for medications, treatments and costs. Significantly, Dr. Paul does have some direct experience in the medical field, and Paul does not necessarily oppose public health programs at the state or local level, as the Constitution permits them to make those decisions.

Dr. Paul believes that by increasing genuine competition by reducing the barriers to entry for private clinics or natural health practitioners, more than enough affordable options will be made available. Imagine if a naturopathic physician was permitted to open a free clinic without cumbersome restrictions dictated by central planners (i.e. large insurance companies and the government).  If they were effective, patients would likely flood them with gratitude and sufficient donations to operate. Now imagine millions of those types of clinics competing to service communities. How can anyone oppose competitive health options? Apparently, those who now run the entire health system are the only ones opposed to such competition -- especially from natural health professionals. The point is, there are options outside the private insurers-vs-universal care debate that can be very beneficial.  The healthcare system will not be fixed overnight, but it starts with opening competition, which Ron Paul desires to usher in.

5. Wedge Issues: Since wedge issues seem to be the only thing the progressive media wants to discuss about mainstream candidates, we'd be remiss not to mention Ron Paul's stance on them. In regards to abortion and gay marriage, Paul's first response is that it's none of the federal government's business to dictate those decisions. Although Paul opposes abortion philosophically, he is adamantly against forcing his personal beliefs on others. He supports the states' right to determine their own laws. Pro-choice progressives who demand a federal abortion policy seem no better than zealot pro-lifers who wish to forcefully impose their beliefs. Ron Paul doesn't solve this divide, but proposes the only sensible middle ground.

Same-sex marriage is slightly more complex. Ron Paul said he supports the right of gay couples to marry because he supports all voluntary associations. However, in terms of tax benefits, since he opposes the income tax from the outset, he tends to oppose all the special credits granted for certain behavior, like marriage. That said, he supports decisions to be made at the state level and not by federal decree. Again, it's the only fair and Constitutional compromise any candidate has proposed.

Some believe that Ron Paul is unelectable, therefore why bother?  Or even if he does become president, he won't be able to move the heavy machinery to make effective changes. Well, don't we have to start somewhere?  Even if Paul doesn't win the nomination, the longer he has the stage to promote the message of peace, liberty, and economic sanity, the better off America will become. The more educated they will be about the Federal Reserve System, the better for when real monetary solutions become necessary.  The more he speaks truth to power, the more he exposes the false political paradigm where there are very few meaningful differences between establishment candidates despite their labels.  Progressives should join Ron Paul's peaceful revolution now if they expect any real change.

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


the_last_name_left said...

Ron Paul should support Progressives over the things he might have something to offer - legalisation of drugs, cuts in defence, for example.

But Progressives should NOT support Ron Paul. No way.

He's a far greater threat to Progressives than the usual. NO DOUBT.

Anonymous said...

He's the only real choice. I think we need to start suing our government officials for violating the constitution with things like the PATRIOT ACT. Obama going to war without congressional consent...

Anonymous said...

Amem to that. I will vote for him even if I have to write him in. If enough people do vote for him regardless of how hard the media scream he isn't electable he will be elected. We all have to start absolutely ignoring ALL media on political decisions. ALL MSM...

Anonymous said...

last name left:
Obama's a freaking neo-con in disguise. How is Ron Paul worse than a neo-con?

Russell's Utility Belt said...

If what's left of your democracy isn't enough, then it's too much to lose. there seems no point in strategic voting - given the directly connected linear policies Obama inherited and furthered from George Dubbya - and so supporting Ron Paul makes sense. Even if he doesn't win, a sizeable groundswell of support will be too much for others to ignore.

I think he's progressive with his stance on the century-old FED, but in reality he's a conservative propounding common sense that has sadly been hijacked across much of the globe.

Anonymous said...

You fools think VOTING will save us? Keep that "lesser of 2 evils" false dichotomy going. I love that people think some pussy, no work, no risk shit is going to get the results they want. WAKE THE FUCK UP.

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul can be respected for his nonstop action to support the US Constitution in the era when the US has become the worst rogue state in the world, however the man wants to gut the entire social safety net as well as give NO PROTECTION for average citizens against RAPACIOUS CORPORATE MALFEASANCE.

the_last_name_left said...

@ anon 9.35

Obama doesn't pose anything like the risk Ron Paul does to things like pensions, healthcare, public education, the environment...blah blah blah.

But I never mentioned Obama.

Seeing as you do.....then Progressives obviously have a lot less to risk by voting Obama than Ron "let the economy collapse and slash public spending" Paul.

Just one example:

Ron Paul voted YES on eliminating the Estate Tax ("death tax").

Voted to pass a bill that would gradually reduce revenue by $185.5 billion over 10 years with a repeal of the estate tax by 2011.

That's a $200Bn handout to the better off.

Where's it coming from?


In contrast Ron Paul voted YES on $99 Bn economic stimulus: capital gains & income tax cuts.

Voted to pass a bill that would grant $99.5 billion in federal tax cuts in fiscal 2002, for businesses and individuals.
The bill would lower the capital gains tax rate from 20% to 18%.

So shareholders get a tax-cut.......oh, very Progressive.

Come off it.

the_last_name_left said...

Liberals who support single-payer government healthcare were brazenly betrayed by Obama during healthcare reform.

no, they were betrayed by people such as Ron "private medicine" Paul.

Inflation, which Paul has been warning about for decades, is the biggest enemy to the middle class and the poor.

No it isn't - unemployment and crap wages are.

Inflation is easily still in single figures. Deflation was the threat - not inflation.

the_last_name_left said...

Ron Paul supports agenda that says:

The capital gains tax should be *eliminated*.
The inheritance tax should be *eliminated*.



Here RonPaul is fighting to allow marble mansions worth millions to be passed along without any tax due. Wealthy individuals can pass along their ill-gotten gains to their children....and pay no tax.

Here Ron Paul is fighting so that the wealthy pay no tax on income earned off of Wall Street. Not only is it cash for free, Ron doesn't want them taxed on it. Nice.

This isn't stuff Progressives can stomach.

What's the point of a Progressive if they accept this stuff? This is all stuff Progressives oppose - they should have nothing to do with RonPaul.

Russell's Utility Belt said...

Anonymous, there's more than one front in the information war.

Anonymous said...

If Ron Paul type thinking is allowed to dominate, racist states will resegregate, as we have already seen states attempting to pass laws inhibiting voting rights; my right to choose to have an abortion will be limited by someone else's wish that I not have an abortion; corporations will face NO limits on who they serve and who they refuse to serve, and that is only the stuff he has said OUT LOUD. If Ron Paul were any MORE scary I would have to suspect he was just a red herring candidate, paid to chase us into the arms of the Corporatocracy.

Anonymous said...

OHH last name: I feel bad for you. You've been brainwashed to be in love with government. Ron Paul doesn't want your pensions, the banksters do and they'll get them too...whether Obama's in or not.

Anonymous said...

You're all so brainwashed it makes me sick...

You actually think racism will prevail if Ron Paul gets into office. Talk about drinking the lefty koolaid. You should be ashamed of your ignorance.

Personal liberty, ending the wars, and replacing the FED are so much more important than the petty crap the progressive media feeds you.

Grow up and think for yourself. Your ignorant hatred for Ron Paul is as bad as racism, yet you'll vote a murderer in once more. bravo

Anonymous said...

How much money do you think we will save by ending the the Military Industrial Complex, the Drug War, and the paychecks for government employees to violate your civil liberties?

Anonymous said...

There'd be little need for cuts....

Anonymous said...

I'm seriously amazed at how many liberals believe the estate tax isn't theft. So I have a family farm I want to pass onto my children that I spent a lifetime building, and my kids cannot afford to keep it when I die? This is ridiculous. The inflationary pressures of our monetary system means middle-class people will be affected by the estate tax. In California, modest homes and land are worth $500+k. This attitude completely destroys incentive to be successful and to pass something onto your children. It isn't all "I'll Gotten" as mentioned by others. I want to keep most of what I earn and not see my children's inheritance squandered by the powers that be in DC. Common good = socialism. If the estate tax was set at least say 5 million, problem solved. 5 million will be about 1 million today in 20 years or so at the current rate of inflation. A million bucks does not buy much in CA when most of us have two people working with a modest home, kids to raise and we still end up with enough monthly debt that it's an endless cycle of serfdom.

Please re-think your positions on the death tax. Taxes only serve as de-motivating factors to those who want to be productive. I want my freedom, liberty and to take care of myself and my family without interference from the so called 'guberment' that is always just, right and does such a good job at managing the affairs of others. There are two kinds of people in this world, those that want to be left alone and those who won't leave others alone. I fit into the first category. I've been a democrat and a republican in my life and I think Paul is the best damned choice for a true pro-liberty America on debt, wars, taxation and civil liberties.

Timothy Bowen said...

I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Political Athiest said...

no, they were betrayed by people such as Ron "private medicine" Paul.

Do you REALLY believe that? It's the DOCTOR'S fault? Wow. I don't even know what to say to that other than obviously the controlled masses are freaking out that Ron Paul and the idea of personal freedom is catching on. The shills are out and they're making stupider and stupider arguments.

I thought "progressives" were capable to critical thought. My bad.

WarhammerTwo said...

From what I understand (and this is coming from a progressive who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000), Paul wants to end tons of stuff on a federal level and let states have most of the power. Your income tax would drop, but state and local taxes would probably go up as each state would have to cover all their own expenses and carry any social programs that are eliminated at the federal level. Forgive me if parts of this don't make sense or my spelling is off -- my kid and I are carrying on a conversation while I'm typing. Anywho, if he ends the wars, cuts military spending, ends the war on drugs, we'll be saving tons of money. Tons. And if individual states want to slap on capital gains taxes and estate taxes, they can. He wants the federal government out of most folks lives. The part of his policies that scare me however, are his stances on a free-for-all corporate environment. I think multinational, multibillion dollar companies are as big a threat to this country (since, being global, they have no loyalty to the USA) as any terrorist. They need to be heavily regulated. That's what scares me about Ron Paul...

Activist said...


Multinational corporations are only a threat because they used gov't regulators (who they own) to squeeze out the competition - Mafia style.

Paul's approach to deregulation is to remove the barriers for small-scale competitors to level the playing field. In most industries the regulations are so stringent and expensive to comply with that economies of scale force the small guy out. The only way to reverse it is so-called deregulation.

Anonymous said...

This is an awesome article. A reasoned argument for looking at the person instead of the label. If we do not regain control of the monetary policy, nothing else matters. Dr. Paul has steadfastly held his positions for over 30 years. Read his book, Liberty Defined, for any particulars.
My wife and I are independents who contribute and have registered rep to vote for Dr. Paul.

Anonymous said...

Sorry folks, lose the illusion, Ron Paul is illuminati, same as the rest of the boys in power. Pick one=pick all. Let's find another way that doesn't include them at all; if we don't, we're bound to repeat history and head for the slaughter. Peace!

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous July9 6:52p Please provide a link for some proof to say Ron Paul is Illuminati.

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul always votes against tax cuts.

If your vision of being a progressive involves seizing other peoples property against their wishes I think you being very short sited. There are more than one way to preserve social services, and as a matter of fact I believe Ron Paul is the only candidate who is actually interested in doing that and has said repeatedly that it is ridiculous to slash social spending while wasting a trillion a year on our oversized military.

Anonymous said...

And you wanna talk about the environment being better off with Obama? That's preposterous. Our military adventures abroad are the single most environmentally disastrous force in the world.

Obamas administration and EPA protect polluting corporations, they don't sue them in court as we the people would be allowed to within a free market.

It's truly distressing to see how little people have thought about these issues.

nader paul kucinich gravel mckinney said...

Ronald Ernest Paul
Dr. Ron's rap video

Anonymous said...

-- I recall a recent NPR interview with Congressman Ron Paul and throughout the interview the interviewer (I forget her name) could never say Congressman Paul or Dr. Paul it was "Mr. Paul" -- how brazen can you get???

Anonymous said...

If the people continuing electing the Bushs and the Obamas and the Romneys and the Palins and the rest of them, they deserve what they get.

Anonymous said...

I would just like to say. Fuck Ron Paul! The guy is a phony. I know, the truth hurts.

Mark of the Wild West said...

Progressives? Oh... like Obama.

Anonymous said...

What makes anyone think Progressive Marxist want any of these things. Their unswayed support of Obama shows they really don't oppose a tyrannical government or his war efforts, they only oppose Republican wars. They support his federal crack down on state rights across the board,they believe a central planning committee is essential to governing and they certainly don't support a free market or lower income taxes! Progressive are against all freedoms to the individual placing the collective above everything else.

Anonymous said...

I think Ron Paul is the perfect choice. He is the only politician over the past decade to never waiver on his stance no matter how much criticism he gets on his ideas.
As far as Progressives are concerned where do you get off thinking that all wealth belongs to the government. And in their benevolence they are nice enough to allow you to keep a certain amount of money to live on? AKA the (Death Tax) Income taxes ect..
Flat tax is the only way for all citizens to feel they contribute. you make 100 you pay 10Bucks you make 1000 you pay 100.00 you make 100K you pay 10K how is that so hard to figure out everyone pays their share and gets equal protection under the law. that way every citizen can be americans and say WE contributed to society. To many people in this country not paying a dime and living off of everyone else.. look it up what percentage of society pays no taxes at all in fact gets money from the government it will make you sick!!!

Anonymous said...

Far Left/Progressive=Socialist

The truth is that the scale is all wrong.

It should be a scale that starts at 1 for statist and works it way up to 10 for Liberty.

Both the extremists on the Left and Right score somewere around 1 give or take a point or two. Libertarians/Minarchists score around 10 give or take a point or two.

Our nation thrived while Liberty and Freedom were the central focus. However, as the left and the right gained more and more power and Liberty took a back seat we have declined at an alarming rate.

The government always gives the people what they want and they always want more more more. Right or Left it's always give me, give me, give me.

Well the right and the left give give give and the people shout more more more. How well is that working out? So the left and right pander to the masses by shelling out trillions, but the politicians still need something more to get in office and make it worth THEIR while. $$$$$$$$ That is were their corporate masters come in to play.

the_last_name_left said...

Ron Paul also $1,000,000+ in investments in international mining companies, trampling the environment to extract resources. He makes plenty out of Wall Street, don't you worry.

He also makes plenty out of his private medical practice.

Good for him, but don't imagine he is looking out for you - he wants tax-cuts. Sure, you'll get a few bucks more, perhaps, but how much MORE will the already wealthy get? And how much LESS will you be getting from government? You want it from the private sector instead? From the nice folks up at Wall Street? You want them teaching your children? You want them looking after your grandmother? Your prisons? Your police? Your army?

Hey - they are happy to do it! All they want is for you to ask.

And Ronnie's their man.

It's funny how you all whine about the cuts and the lack of jobs, and the lack of prospects, and blah blah blah............but when someone wants to address these things directly you all cry "SOCIALIST!!!" BOOGABOOGAAA!!

If you think government-run healthcare and education is bad, wait until your mates on Wall Street are through with it.

You corruscate the BANKSTERS and WALL ST and THE ELITES and BLAH BLAH BLAH - then you say you want to privatise evrything, and put the same corporates and people in charge of everything!

Yeah, abolish the FED! Let's put them in charge of healthcare instead! Great idea!!

If bankers and corporations can't run banking and the economy, why do you think they can run healthcare and education?

Seems a little crazy to me.

Anonymous said...

I would just like to say. Fuck Ron Paul! The guy is a phony. I know, the truth hurts.

oh thank you somuch for telling me the truth, very wise words.
now, go and get your handouts...loser.

Anonymous said...

Hey left, you know what seems crazy to me? Doing more of the same and expecting change.

Ps the FED is a private banking cartel much like the Insurance Barons that Obama just stuck us with. (mandated)

Ron Paul is against corporate welfare Obama and almost all the other Dems voted for it.

Education stinks because throwing money at it doesn't work, it never has and it never will.

Yes Socialists and Fascists are both Statists who don't believe in freedom or liberty so they are the problem and not the solution. BOOGABOOGAA. I know liberty is scary you might have to take care of yourself.

Endless wars (including the drug war) for endless corporate profits, Bailouts for the too big to fail. More pork than all the grills in the world can hold.

Now call me crazy for feeding this troll, that I would deserve. But you never know, just possibly someone might read this and understand just how completly rediculous the far left is.

Anonymous said...

No body should vote for paul until he admits 911 truth.

Anonymous said...

I've seen enough, read enough, experienced enough now to know that Congressman Paul is the real deal and I plan to vote for him, as will my wife, my parents, many of my friends.

It's time to begin digging our way out of this mess.

robert said...

God I wish i wasn't stuck on my phone. Ill say this, there is no one, absolutely no one else who will allow you to look after yourself. Fuck everything else, the programs, the wars, the budget if you want to be free....if you want to live in the manner Thomas Jefferson envisioned for us, Ron Paul.

There is no other choice and the only reason a man or woman does not support him is because he does not want to force their beliefs down someone elses throat.

Nothing we have been doing works, nothing. Maybe just maybe, we should start doing something different.

Oh and lol @ RP illuminati. OMG Ron Paul is one of them yet you support the other them candidates? So at the very least, you support a them candidate that does more to set you free than the others...even if he is one of "them".

farmer said...

This time I will vote for Ron Paul and nothing anyone has said here has changed my mind even a little bit. Some are so indoctrinated with Communist ideology or fascist pragmatism that they can't see the forest for the trees.
Thomas Jefferson was concise in his early warning to the American nation, "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
If Ron Paul only had one plank in his platform and that plank was "End The Federal Reserve" I would vote for him. If he were neutral on every other issue, I would still vote for him. If I knew he was going to die in office I would still vote for him. Just look at him. He isn't pretentious, flamboyant, hot tempered or fickle. He is on the other hand unassuming and straight forward. He understands fiscal responsibility and real world economics better than 99.99% of paid shills. What would it be like to have a patriot and not a politician for president? At 59, I pray it happens in my lifetime. Reality has turned my world upside down. Bankers are absolutely taking control of the world. The Mideast is WWIII with a new methodology. One nation at a time, falling to the bankers. The United States is on the list of targets. Ron Paul has a strong motivation for working as hard as he does at his age. Children and grand children. Thank You Congressman Paul for giving up a life of lazy days in the pool with grand kids for long days suffering traitors, fools and sycophants. For myself, I am very grateful.

Anonymous said...

Tom Woods: The "progressive" Left always prefers a neoconservative to an antiwar libertarian.

Anonymous said...

I've seen a lot stupid comments on articles...but this one has got to top them all. What a bunch of lies and outright propaganda. Slaves to the corporate media are alive and well I see.

Ron Paul 2012!

Anonymous said...

This all amounts to a pipe dream if you do not address the issue of who actually counts the actual votes cast.

people in america are not aware of the fact that you have an israeli firm that counts all the actual votes cast and also an israeli company diebold that builds the electronic voting machines.

are americans so dumb that they can not count the actual votes cast or for that unable to make the voting machines?

Philip J Dennany said...

If the only choice was Obama or Paul, I would have to vote for Paul. But we need someone like Sanders, Lee, Zucchini and others that believe in regulation and anti-trust enforcement.

Anonymous said...

I like Ron Paul.
Unfortunatley, if he actually ever became a threat as a candidate, (not likely given the media and the majority who are bemused by its smoke and mirrors) he would simply be struck down. You can't talk about stopping the flow of billions (trillions?) into the coffers of killers without getting kilt your own self.

So yeah, if he were to actually become a real candidate, he would either change his song ( a la every other politician) or 'they' would have to off him in one way or another.
So actually - doesn't it seem unlikely that he even stands a chance?
It looks to me that positive change will not be happening from within this gargantuan corruption we like to call the system.
(I hope I am wrong)
Oh and lastnameleft you are clearly, clearly, clearly either a fool or a shill. What is it you believe in? What is your ultimate motive for being here? Do you ever say anything nice? Is it ever your hope that eventually these discussions will be reasonable and personable? Or are you simply here to bring others down into your crappy little hole?


Winsmith said...

If no candidate speaks against our exterminatation by chlorination or fluoridation or speaks against subsidies for milk, sugar and tobacco, all killers,is it not suicidal to vote for anyone? For 15 years, the professionals at the EPA have been telling the world that fluoride is killing people, search: nteu fluoride. See:, www.dorway,com., and

Anonymous said...

I believe the comments on your article from the left proves you wrong Mr.Blair. As you can see they really could care less about issues. Like Pavlov's dog they have been groomed to react and not think. You say Ron Paul they salivate all over themselves waiting to take a chunk out some fictitious character they've taught to react to. Issues, common sense, considering a new concept mean nothing to them.

Anonymous said...

I can give you ONE good reason why NO reasonable person should support Ron Paul. Ever. HE IS A DIED IN THE WOOL RACIST! Don't take MY word for it. Take HIS.....>>>>>>>

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” - Ron Paul-1992

"Liberals want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare. Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”--Ron Paul-1992

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." - Ron Paul, 1992

"black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." - Ron Paul, 1992

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." - Ron Paul, 1992

CSA said...

@the-last-name-left, this is not your North Korean Communist Paradise, it's America. I'm sorry you were born into the wrong country, but you can't change ours. You can however cross the border to North Korea and be with your own kind. So please go, have a nice trip and don't eat too much.

PS: Since you love your Kenyan president Odumba so much, please please please take him with you!!!

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul immediately disavowed the newsletter article as soon as it came out. The staffer responsible was immediately fired.

So no, he doesn't currently hold those views. In fact, he never did.
In response to Anonymous who said:
Anonymous said...

I can give you ONE good reason why NO reasonable person should support Ron Paul. Ever. HE IS A DIED IN THE WOOL RACIST! Don't take MY word for it. Take HIS.....>>>>>>>

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” - Ron Paul-1992

"Liberals want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare. Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”--Ron Paul-1992

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." - Ron Paul, 1992

"black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." - Ron Paul, 1992

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." - Ron Paul, 1992
The Obama guy who doesn't even have any records of evidence that he ever existed
is a racist.He armed the Mexican drug cartels with his other racist Eric Holder with 2009 Stimulus money and tried to blame it on American gun owners.
He sends unmanned drones to murder people of a different race than him in Pakistan and Libya.
Eric Holder called (white)Americans a nation of cowards.
Now who's a racist?

Anonymous said...

Farmer, you hit the nail on the head. My vote is also for Ron Paul.

madranger said...

Everyone on this thread should read Farmer's. I could not agree more.

Anonymous said...

My my, the FUD is out in force. So much unfounded hyperbolic hysteria from these silly brainwashed "progressives."

Nader and Kucinich, your progressive darlings, endorse Paul - you would be wise to learn why. I don't think Dennis would vote for a "racist," or someone who would let BP do whatever it wants without regard for Law, do you?

No, he wouldn't. Now WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!

P.S. @the_last_name_left: you've got to be one of the most uninformed, irrational, brain dead morons on the face of the planet to think that anything you said applies in any meaningful manner to the person you're talking about. You've got a nice strawman there wrapped up in the flag of false dichotomy. You obviously haven't learned the difference between the State and capitalism. Answer these questions:

Where does corporate personhood come from?
Is corporate personhood a concept supported by Ron Paul?
How would business operate without corporate personhood?

Truth lies in the answers.

Anonymous said...

As a proud progressive, voting for Ron Paul this time around is a given. I certainly disagree with many of his stances BUT I am VERY much in agreement with the most important ones: Ending the FED and ending all of the wars (overseas, drug war, etc.). I was initially worried that Paul would let the big corporations run wild amongst us "small" people, but am convinced otherwise, since he wants to end all corporate subsidies and has been the strongest voice against the bailouts of the giant banks and corporations -- But the biggest reason is that he has NO corporate sponsors!! The very fact that big biz isn't flocking to Paul, is proof enough that he isn't a corporate yes-man.

My 2 cents.

Anonymous said...

I have read many of the comments here. For the "progressives" here, how many times must something be taxed in order to satisfy you guys? Every time anything changes hands? Man, you guys need some (Austrian) economics lessons!

Anonymous said...

There is no right or left,
There is only right and wrong.
The establishment system is destroying our very way of life, which was founded upon INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, a two part term, which is represented by freedom on one hand, and responsibility on the other. The responsibility to defend and protect our freedom is just as important as the freedom we were meant to live in.
Ron Paul has always honored his responsibility in congress to follow his oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution to insure our rights are not infringed upon. All of our "individual" rights in accordance with the constitution.
And he doesn't just talk about it.

Anonymous said...

Progressives should not wait to see if Paul wins the Republican nomination to vote for Ron Paul in a General election. I think it is important to register as a republican (while firmly holding your nose) and vote for Ron Paul in the Republican primary of your state. We all know who the Democrat nominee is going to be so there is no need to wait out the primary. In fact, I say that not voting for Ron Paul in the Republican Primary is a vote for Obama/Bush policies. If progressives come out in force for Ron Paul's primary runs, he can wins some important states. This will send a big message to Obama on the policies that are going to dominate the general campaign debate. Obama will be forced to run against Paul's policies as soon as he wins some important state primaries. (I am talking to you Californians, New Yorkers and Texans!) It is a win/win for Progressives if Obama expedites troop drawdowns in anticipation of running against Paul in the general, even if we know it is a temporary campaign move. The fewer people killed, the better.

Anonymous said...

Of course big business doesn't worry about organized labor; they can promise unions anything they want and as long as they have access to an unlimited supply of government printed money, they can surreptitiously redistribute wealth to the top all the while devaluing anything the unions gain, and then when they get minimum wage hikes, that just places heavier tax burdens on the working classes. Have you noticed that tax brackets never keep pace with inflation? The way Obama and his ilk are going, we're all going to be paying the top tax bracket and everybody's going to be homeless and starving. That's what fiat money is: a secret tax on the working poor!

The greatest threat to labor and unions is the fiat currency system!

Anonymous said...

I have been a lifelong democrat but now realize there is no difference. Getting rid of the FED is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to accomplish, followed immediately by getting out of the worlds wars. Making those corrections will allow the rest of the pieces to find their place in time. The Constitution is not "out of date" or "irrelevant" it remains a great document for a country to follow. Get rid of the FED, the Wars and back to the states rights mandate in the Constitution. I will vote for that and take my chances on the rest.

Anonymous said...

I hear the statement that Ron Paul's views will establish a corporate conrolled state where the american worker will suffer as a slave under corporate conrol. The rich will become richer and poor poorer...

If this is the case WHY isnt big business and the wealthy behind him? They should be throwing money at him.

Ask yourself.

Anonymous said...

1. He's an economic nut case.
2. He thinks property rights are more important than any other rights.
3. His statements about the Civil Right Act put him beyond the pale.

By all means support him if you want, but don't think you can call yourself even remotely progressive if you do.

Anonymous said...

If Corporations OWN our government, why SEND more money to it? If government is NOT for the people, and is instead OWNED by Goldman Sachs, Wall Street, the Haliburtons, the bankers...then WHY should we be sending MORE of our middle class tax money to the government? I think abolishing the income tax is a great idea because for the simple reason that it would benefit the little guy much more than the big owners of our government.

four legs good said...

Good heavens, you people supporting Paul sound like crazy people. Trust me, I'm from Texas and Paul is a nutter. Get. A. GRIP.

Broadway Carl said...

"There aren't many people still calling Ron Paul's ideas radical."

Seriously? Ron Paul wants to get rid of Social Security and Medicare altogether and progressives are currently freaking out over President Obama entertaining reform to make them stronger and more sustainable. And you're seriously considering Ron Paul? You've gone off the deep end, my friend.

Anonymous said...

Looking forward to vote Ron Paul in 2012!

Cornelius said...

Blair's post strikes me as alibertarain appeal to progressives. You might wan to try this progressive appeal to progressives to elect Ron Paul:

Anonymous said...

Hey, just wanted to let you know I added your article to my News Feed on One of the best summaries I've seen so far on why liberals should support Ron. Feel free to share my site, my top 3 videos are end the war, end war on drugs, and get government out of marriage. Trying to appeal to young people and liberals who can switchover or otherwise may not be involved in politics!

Anonymous said...

if he was a british politician i would vote for him.

Anonymous said...

Too late, Ron is past his time. Wrote him in on the ballot in 08, but nobody "understood him" then. They had to wait till they got hit in the pocketbook by Obama. Now they all love him. Well Ron's aged some, and the media just acts like he doesn't exist. I will vote for him again, but he won't win. That's because the rest of the voters are too late and just finally woke up. Well, congratulations newly minted Ron Paul supporters, you get it now, but its too late. Dumbasses.

Anonymous said...

Let local communities organize and regulate themselves as they wish, without interference from crony capitalists and corrupt politicians. We are suffocating under the burden of debt, inflation, and regulation. This libertarian socialist and disillusioned Obama voter will be voting for Ron Paul this time around.

Anonymous said...

Support the only Anti-War presidential candidate: Ron Paul!

Help spread the word on Facebook. Like "The Peace President"

Anonymous said...

The one common factor I have found amongst most progressives I have found is envy. Instead of wanting the chance to improve their lives by winning back the liberties and freedoms they would rather bring down those that have succeeded. Rather than have a government that would tax less, leaving much more money in their own pockets to do the things they want done, they look to take more from others, give it to the government and hope that it will do the right thing (which it has proven over and over it won't). Go ahead and dream, hope the government will somehow miraculously change and be the benevolent dictator that will give you all the things you wish for. The first honest man to run for president for over two decades is ready to give you an even playing field and the rights, liberties, and freedoms to let YOU better your standard of living but you won't support him because he has an "R" after his name and that has to be evil. If you do not support this man then I say you are going to get EXACTLY what you DESERVE!

Anonymous said...

I'm a progressive.
While I disagree with Ron Paul on a number of issues (such as his belief that we need to cut taxes for the super-rich instead of excessively taxing them to restore some sanity after they've had decades in which to accumulate illicit wealth), he is the only candidate who is sane in terms of foreign policy, restoring liberty and fixing up (as in abolishing) the Federal Reserve.

While I am likely to complain about a lot of things if he were to get elected, he sure has my vote as the MUCH lesser of 2 evils.

David H said...

Farmer's post is the top post, the rest is garbage, vote Ron Paul 2012 if you are among the few that truly understand how the world has been run for the last few thousands of years. First, we need to stop the tribal warfare in America, liberal, conservative.... THESE ARE THE CHAINS PEOPLE CAN'T YOU HEAR THEM?

Any person of the 'liberal' persuasion that is promoting tax increases on anyone right now... you are ludicrous. You are playing right into the globalist plan that is now to simply collapse this country fully. You think raising taxes will encourage anyone to hire? We need across the board tax cuts like Kennedy did, and once we can collectively get America back on track, then we can raise taxes on the billionaires and implement a sane tax like the Tobin tax on financial transactions. Stop Wall Street and the big banks in there tracks.

The only way to fix America right now is across the board tax cuts, and we as a people need to either remove the Federal Reserve(my choice) or: force them to buy $2 trillion in state bonds, we need to put state bank deposits in state owned and run banks like in North Dakota(best off state in the Union right now), we as a people force those funds to be used for infrastructure rebuilding/rail/maglift/thorium energy reactors, molten salt reactors, remove ALL nuclear reactors worldwide, and stop all wars.

It's a start.

Chris Bedford said...

I am encouraged to see other Progressives supporting the positive aspects of Ron Paul’s agenda. My two hot button issues are ending the war economy and bringing back civil liberties. And Ron Paul significantly ‘out progressives’ our current White House Occupant in these areas.

I have strong disagreements with Ron Paul’s platform with respect to social programs and regulation. But I don’t plan to just vote for Ron Paul and stop being active. I will fight him where I disagree by also supporting Elizabeth Warren, Kucinich and other progressive congressional candidates in the hopes that things balance out.

No one politician is going to do it all. But I am tired of Progressive happy talk from Obama followed up by betrayals like the health care reform give-away to insurance companies.

I strongly believe Progressives can work together with Libertarians by focusing on areas where they agree rather than points of disagreement. I see the Frank Ron Paul marijuana reform bill as one outcome of such cooperation [ ]

I have more to say on the site that I started…. Please let me know what you think:

dale said...

A week ago, I told a co-worker, who knows I am a radical progressive/left libertarian that the ideal President would be Ron Paul who would have NO power to implement his reactionary economic and racial policies but who had power as Commander in chief to end all our wars and bring troops home from 180 nations, which would save hundreds of billions. I said this to show how absurd the current menu of candidates is.
Now the author states the same idea but actually means it.

In the process, he overlooks Paul's racist and neo-Nazi connections (he says they are absurd but provides no indication he has read the Ron Paul Report) and distorts many facts.

For instance, he says food prices have gone up 39% in the last year. Anyone who shops for food knows this is absurd. Food is up but much less.

I went to the link he provided and he misstated the rise of the food index of 39% as a rise of 39% in food prices. In fact, the food that has gone up the most, sugar is vastly overconsumed and should be cut back, which would decrease the price. Some foods, like cereals (from the link he provided), have declined. Here is a statement that shows how far off he is:

"Average food prices in the UK jumped by 4.9% in the year to May – a 23-month high – while last month, the FAO and OECD jointly predicted that food prices would soar by as much as 30% over the next 10 years."

30% is 10 years is a far cry from 39% in one year. With such sloppy research, I understand why he overlooks the fact that Ron Paul has supported every tax cut for the rich and wants to repeal the public accommodation section of the Civil Rights Act.

Now, Paul supporters are threatening people who criticize or mock them. See" Ron Paul supporters threaten Atlanta family with rape, death" at for many examples of Paul radicals threatening people.

Ron Paul supporters should join Progressives in opposing war and the M/I complex but no genuine progressive could possibly support a man who made money off a racist magazine and was considered by the American Nazi Party to be "one of us."

You don't have to forgive Paul his racist past to work to end war and the bloated defense budget and the stripping of civil rights by the National Security State. In the anti-Democratic elections of 2010, the members of the Progressive Caucus won 95% of their races. A recent Pew Poll shows that the term progressive has 67% approval rating, far more than any other, including libertarianism. This is no time for progressives to compromise sacred principles for the illusion/fantasy of a Paul Presidency. This is the time for progressives to invite others to join their popular ideas (like the public option and taxing the rich, which Paul opposes but the public agrees by about 75%).

Post a Comment