Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelafemme
Since Kobi brought up Ron Paul, does anyone else feel comfortable sharing their thoughts on him with us? I am taking a serious look at him but have never voted any other way than a full Democratic ticket.
|
To add to what has already been said:
There are some things about Ron Paul that really scare me. His stand on immigration for one. Among a wide assortment of immigration reform he wants to see implemented that are disturbing this is my favorite; he doesn't want children of illegal immigrants who are born in the U.S. to be citizens.
He doesn't want us to get involved in a war with Iran and that is surely our next war so that's good.
He is adamantly against a woman's right to choose.
He has a sort of left handed upside down backward stand on gay marriage. He believes it is a state's decision. He doesn't want to see a federal law. He did vote for DOMA. He doesn't want marriage legalized across the country. And he hopes to do this by keeping it in the hands of individual states and allowing, as DOMA allows for the federal government to refuse to recognize state gay marriages, for one state to refuse to recognize another state's or another country's marriage. Not very good news for binational couples and Paul's immigration policies would also be a nightmare for binational couples.
Not that it's up for questioning to my knowledge but here Paul wrote of his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964:
"[It] not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business's workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge's defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife."
Apparently Paul is of the opinion that we are in need of a color-blind society. And since we do not have one the Civil Rights Act failed. He also appears to believe since on cannot legislate tolerance then human rights and whether people get them or not should be kept out of the hands of government and left to individual citizens to decide. A feeling which explains his position on gay marriage a bit more clearly.
He is against abolishing the electoral college and would also like to see the members of the state legislatures chose US senators instead of having them voted in by popular election as they are now.
From what I can gather economically Paul is still with the rest in protecting big business and corporate America. He just has different jargon to explain his positions. He takes a slightly different road but it's the same route. As with most of his stands it's all very convoluted but mostly the results are the same. To me the reason why shit things are happening isn't as important as shit things are happening. If you just shift the reasoning for allowing shit things to continue to happen I don't see how that will make those to whom shit things are happening feel any better.
To me really it's the same old free market capitalism bull shit.