90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
An In-Depth Look At Ron Paul

Ron Paul 2012 Contender? Spoiler? Hero? Or Not? We’ll look at this singular GOP

Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, listens to a group chanting "We are the 99%" during a town hall meeting in Keene, N.H., Monday, Nov. 21, 2011.  (AP)

Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, listens to a group chanting "We are the 99%" during a town hall meeting in Keene, N.H., Monday, Nov. 21, 2011. (AP)

Texas congressman and libertarian-minded Republican Ron Paul has been in politics for a long time now. Twelve terms in the House. More than one swing – typically quixotic – at the presidency.

But never has Ron Paul’s sway been as apparent and his presidential ambitions as on fire as they are right now. The country is worried, and Ron Paul is a refreshingly candid “true believer” with an answer. Slash government to the bone. Bring the troops home from everywhere. Scrap the Fed. Defend personal liberty. And go free market.

This hour, On Point: the banner year of Ron Paul.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Nick Gillespie, editor in chief of Reason.com and Reason TV.

Ned Martel, reporter for the Washington Post. His recent story on Ron Paul is here.

Ben Levine, a student at Drake University and an Iowa precinct captain for Ron Paul 2012.

Max Boot, Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow for National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Highlights

Ron Paul has a fiercely devoted following nationwide and particularly in Iowa, where he’s polling in a tie for second in the GOP primary.

“We have a lot of candidates who are like weak tea,” said Nick Gillespie, the editor in chief of the libertarian website Reason.com “Ron Paul is a double shot of espresso and it presents a true alternative to what most Republicans, much less most Democrats, are saying.”

Paul talks bluntly about what he thinks is right and wrong and his message doesn’t change, Gillespie said.

But what explains Ron Paul’s draw? “This is a time when people want answers to what has gone wrong with the country and he as a person who has been in office for 25 years is a sort of wise figure,” said Ned Martel, a reporter for the Washington Post who wrote about Paul during a trip to Iowa recently. “You can see them stare at his lectures, and that’s what they are really sort of academic lectures, as if he is some type of Yoda figure.”

What would Ron Paul’s America look like, with 80 percent of the federal government cut? “What he’s bettering on is that people don’t really know what the Interior Department does, or what the Commerce Department or the Labor Department do, and that they wouldn’t miss them when they are gone,” Gillespie said.

Gillespie said that Paul’s points are not without merit. The Department of Education, he says, which only came into being in 1980, has not done much to increases in the academic achievement of U.S. students and should be abolished.

It the wake of the financial crisis, Gillespie said, people have been looking in greater detail at institutions like the Federal Reserve, which has long been a target of Paul’s political rhetoric.

“You’ll hear some of his rhetoric wherever you go on the campaign trail,” Martel said, noting that topics like the influence of the Federal Reserve wouldn’t have been a national issue without Ron Paul’s candidacy.

 From Tom’s Reading List

The Washington Post “Ron Paul is the Rodney Dangerfield of Republican presidential candidates. The 12-term Texas congressman ran for president on the Libertarian Party ticket back in 1988 and was widely seen as a sideshow in 2008, despite finishing third in the GOP field behind John McCain and Mike Huckabee. Why, despite a small but devoted set of supporters, does this 76-year-old obstetrician turned politician routinely get no respect from the media and GOP operatives? Let’s take a look at what “Dr. No” — a nickname grounded in his medical career and his penchant for voting against any bill increasing the size of government — really stands for.”

Mother Jones “If at any point during the past three decades you had suggested that Ron Paul might win a major Republican nominating contest, you’d probably get a response resembling the face the Texas congressman makes when he’s outlining the case for legalizing the sale of raw milk: two parts incredulity, one part mild amusement, a dash of electric shock.”

The American Thinker “Ron Paul, a physician, has earned himself the name “Dr. No” by refusing to vote for any bill which assumes powers other than those given in Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution. When one takes a sober look at our country today, it’s easy to see why Dr. Paul would behave this way.”

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • http://freeourfreemarkets.org Steve Banicki

    What a refreshing, consistent and honest politican. It is unfortuanate that I cannot agree with many of his views like eliminating the Federal Reserve. I admire him.

    I am a free market conservative. I voted republican in every presidential election since 1968, except one. It is obvious that our government must live within its means and do so in a manner as not to interfere with a functioning free market economy. If we desire to take control of government, we must demand government carry out one of its primary functions; protecting free markets from tyranny, both public and private. We are vocal about defending it from public tyranny, but silent when it comes to tyranny in the private sector.

    “Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficial. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greater dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” Justice Louis Brandeis 1928

    Today our focus seems to be only on the tyranny of government when it comes to free markets. We need to find the right balance.
    Read More http://bit.ly/nRWmD7

  • George Washington

    The Federal Reserve has failed in its two mission objectives.

    It has failed to keep inflation low. It has failed on keeping unemployment low.

    The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE banking entity, not a government one.  It attempts to create wealth by printing money at the cost devaluing the dollar.  I beg you again to look into the issue. Present 1 reason why the FR needs to exists, leaching and printing money off the backs of the hard working American People.

    Ron Paul 2012 Please…
    Track Record and Substance OVER Rhetoric and Flip Flopping..
    Thank you

    • Hidan

      You hear how the Reserve lent out over 14 trillion without the knowledge of Treasury or Congress? To top it off the money was lent at .001% which many of the banks than went on to buy TBills with that money at around 3% making an 10 Billion dollar profit. All while Congress was setting up Tarp and a few years later.

  • Hidan

    Though I disagree with some of his domestic views. I believe that having him for president would allow moderation in congress and most of his extreme domestic policies probably wouldn’t get passed. But on our Foreign Policy he has it right, The P.Act He has it right,War on Drugs, War on Terror, our Blind support for Israel, The abuse of Presidential powers, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan,our vast bases around the world. The recent undemocratic bill passed in the senate 93-7,

    I’d vote for Paul or Obama.

  • Hidan

    Quoting Ben Franklin (somewhat)

    Ron Paul Educates Newt Gingrich on The Patriot Act

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es-hpxj01uQ

    Endless wars and owns Flip flop Mitt
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYgAbkXOAsw&feature=related

    END THE DRUG WARS owning Perry(not to hard)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze5BBwBP-hc&feature=related

    Ron Paul owns Cain on Iran/Israel/Egpyt. This got him banned from the RJC
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI1YeJ7KRtE&feature=related

    • Gerald Fnord

      Since Franklin has been invoked in an appeal to Authority, I guess then that Ron Paul would agree with the patriots Ben Franklin and Tom Paine that all property above a savage’s rude hut, coat, and match-lock were created by Society, and so answerable to the needs of that Society down to the last mil, not as a matter of altruism but as the repayment of a just debt.

  • Hidan
  • tunnelman

    I wonder if he has any followers other white males?
    Sure, he makes other politicians look foolish with his straight ahead, uncompromising attitude. But if he got elected and his ideas were put into practice..
    Do we really want to relive the Jim Crow era? Do we want to give the robber barons more free reign? 
    i personally think the 1964 civil rights act was good thing (unlike Ron Paul)

    • http://twitter.com/urielsword urielsword

      Sir there is a large following of all types of people that follow Ron Paul. Go to YouTube and you will find a wealth of information on Ron Paul.

    • Bart

      “tunnel man”   You’ve got tunnel vision !  We DO live in a Jim Crow era ! Blacks disproportionally fill our jails ! The “War on Drugs” IS Jim Crow!!

  • Michiganjf

    Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican candidate who is not utterly clowinish, moronic, and hypocritical.

    Though his Libertarian ideas regarding free market capitalism and small government are often naive and/or nonsensical, he also espouses some of the best of Libertarianism regarding civil liberties, foreign policy, and law enforcement.
    I stop short, of course, of his belief that Equal Rights and civil liberties are at odds in any way, and I’d go so far as to say that affirmative action is justified for obvious historical reasons when it comes to educational opportunity, though not the workplace.

    To his credit, Ron Paul has challenged many Righties to question Republican/conservative orthodoxy, often without their even knowing it… meaning that just a short time ago, such questioning was heretical to the Republican brand, and Ron Paul snuck it in under the radar at the opportune moment when some conservatives could no longer defend the Republican Congress or Bush/Cheney.
    This was perhaps THE ONLY good thing to come out of Republicans and Bush/Cheney running our country into the ground, and the resulting rift in Conservativism is likely to last at least a while longer.
    Ahhh, it was great for a bit, seeing conservatives so confused about their support of Republicans, until the Tea Party came along as a psuedo-alternative and allowed Righties to return from limbo, pull their heads out of the sand, and rally unwittingly back to the same Republican Party which only so recently thoroughly trashed their brand.
    Damn, maybe that rift in Conservatism won’t last so long after all….

    • nj

      [[ Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican candidate who is not utterly clowinish, moronic, and hypocritical. ]]

      No, Huntsman shares the distinction.

      • Michiganjf

        OK, Agreed.

  • PhotoFlop

    Gee On Point, couldn’t you find a more flattering picture of Ron Paul.

    You know, like the 4 nice pictures of Gingrich you posted over a 3-week period:  Nov.18, Nov.30, Dec.2, Dec.9

    Gingrich’s complimentary photos were exhibited 12.5% of the time over a period of 27, On Point, shows.

    Now, that’s fair and balanced, isn’t it? 

  • Augustolucarelli

    Hello to everybody, I’m wring from across the pond (Italy) and if you allow my humble opinion, I think that RP is right about many issues, particularly about the FED.  If I were American I’d support him.  I think that he should push even further about monetary policy:  1) don’t allow the government to borrow from private bankers; 2) don’t allow the fractional banking landing;  3) the Congress should have the money quantity in circulation under his control, debt free; 4) cancel the personhood amendment and bring back the political responsibility back to the People and not to corporations.  You’ve done several times during your wonderful history:  remember just Andrew Jackson and the greenback experiment under President Lincoln to pay for the Civil War.  And you have very wonderful examples at State level: just consider the North Dakota Bank and the recent proposal for creation of a California state Bank. My source is Bill Still and I strongly feel that he’s right.  Just Google that name, but I’m sure that you know much more about this issue than me.  We in Europe have zero chance of making any significant breakthrough about this core issue but you may have a fair possibility to change the status quo.  Have a nice day!

  • JUST CORY PLEASE!

    What happens when an unconventional candidate proposing radical change actually wins an election?  Does anyone think Ron Paul could end foreign antanglements, the war on drugs, or repeal the civil rights act?  Changes like this need to come from the bottom up, not the top down.  Paul would be utterly sandbagged by congress and the status quo.

    • Anonymous

      We all know what would happen. Nada.
      That’s why Ron Paul will never win.
      He might just become the GOP spoiler if he decides to run as an independent. Which would be an interesting situation.  

    • Anonymous

      I agree, that a president Ron Paul would not be able to accomplish everything he calls for, but he could make more change than Obama has, and Obama has done a lot of change trough regulation, not legislation.  

      Ron Paul would put the US back on the right track.

    • Ivanhoe

      Electing Ron Paul would be the first step in a “bottom up” movement. 

    • kaybee63

      Yeah, folks, he’d be President, not King!  Every election looks like these folks could actually do something once they got there – it’s not a dictatorship people!

    • Modavations

      I do.It won’t happen overnight,but the ship could begin the turn around.It took us 45 years to get in this state(I start with LBJ.s War on Poverty)and will take 20 years to reform

    • Dave

      Yeah! Let’s do nothing!!

      More of the same! More of the same!

    • Anonymous

      Disqus keeps blowing my comments out so I re post this a third time.

      You mean like Obama.

  • Bob

    What happens to aperson who takes control of there own destiny and get medical insurance to cover their health. later they get a condition where no insurance company will insure them. It takes $100K to get them to their grave. Under the libertarian model what are they supposed to do Ron Paul?
    Who pays Ron Paul’s medical bills – we do. When Regan got Alzheimer’s Disease, who paid his hospital. We did.

    • Benfatto

      As a doctor, Ron Paul did not accept medicare or medicaid payments from government, but preferred to treat poor patients for free. Before there was government involvement in medicine, there were plenty charity hospitals and doctors giving away treatment. Only old people will remember that

  • Anonymous

    Why the gold standard is not such a good idea.

    http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/gold-standard-wont-make-things-better

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/02/15/133662179/a-wingnut-argument-for-the-gold-standard

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/40088925/Roubini_Here_s_Why_a_Gold_Standard_Won_t_Work

    The other problem, gold reserves. Not one bank in this country has enough reserves to back up the assets they have. So even by my limited knowledge on economics I can see this as a bit of a problem.

     

    • Anonymous

      If the Gold Standard Is So Good, Why No Standard?

      The basic answer is that it would prevent central bankers, and governments, from doing something they have become very fond of over the past several decades–attempting to solve their economic difficulties with some sort of “easy money” policyhttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/05/22/if_the_gold_standard_is_so_good_why_no_standard_255858.html

      • Anonymous

        Read the history of the gold standard.
        The depressions and recessions were more frequent and worse. You talk about easy money, which shows me that you have a pretty skewed view on monetary policy. Which is why you like the gold standard.

        The other thing most people do not deal with is that there is not enough gold in reserves to back up our dollar. How do you deal with that? 

        • Joe72172

          let the price of gold rise to $10,000 an ounce to reflect all the money that has been printed.  Otherwise, the fed will print us into hyperinflation

          • Anonymous

            Hyperinflation was a product of the gold standard, at least in Germany’s case after WW1.

            As for inflation in 2000 terms a dollar now is worth $1.31.
            Not what I would call a huge amount of inflation is it.
            In fact during this whole economic downturn inflation in this country has remained pretty flat.

          • Joe72172

            The $ has lost 95% of its  value since the inception of the federal reserve.

          • Modavations

            I take it you understand food prices,etc,are not counted.If there were no inflation gold wouldn’t have jumped from $400.;00 per ounce in 2005 to 1700.00

    • Anonymous

      MARK DOW: Finally, People Are Beginning To Understand That All This Money-Printing Isn’t Causing Inflation

      Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-dow-money-printing-not-causing-inflation-2011-12#ixzz1gQIDErMk

      • Ivanhoe

        The graph is bullcrap. It only goes back to 2001 (this is called cherry picking) and it only compares the dollar to OTHER FIAT CURRENCIES, many of which are admittedly doing worse right now. Take the graph back to 1913 and compare the value of the dollar to something tangible like gold or a pound of bacon and you’ll see a very different story.

    • Gerald Fnord

      Just looking at the experience of Great Britain as it headed into the Great Depression is argument enough.

      It’s weird that people who don’t believe in absolute valuation of anything—bread, land, your kidneys—are absolutists on the absolute value of money relative to gold…which value is intimately dependent on how much of its were mined in such secure and/or friendly places as South Africa and Russia.  This isn’t to say that our current system were best or even close, but the goldbugs are the religious fundamentalists of economics, and prone to all the errors of fundamentalists.

      • Anonymous

        The “bread standard”.  That certainly makes about as much sense as gold.

    • Modavations

      Let me translate.Jeffee is against the gold standard because it forces fiscal discipline.If you don’t have responsible budgeting,people turn in dollars for gold.Just like France during Vietnam.This austerity is the death knell of the Welfare State,for  which Jeffee is “water carrier”.We waste so much money that a sincere technician could cut the govt.in half and there’d still be money left, for means tested welfare programs.By the way we have 500billion in bullion in Fort Knox

      • Anonymous

        So you complain about people calling people names and debasing you but you seem to through enough mud to talk pal. By the way 500 billion is not enough to back up a $14.5 trillion economy.
        Do the math, it does not work.

        As for wasting money I hope your boss knows that your wasting his time spending hours every day on the On Point web site.
        I’m off today by the way.

        • Modavations

          Are you not a Water carrier for the Welfare state.When have I ever called you Troll,Einstein,Idiot,Sparky,

        • Modavations

          It took us 45 years to get in this predicament and will take 20 years to reverse,.You ease in to it.We had the gold standard until 1973(?)

        • Modavations

          We would term that “subjective opinion”.Arn’t you here every day.We call that hypocrosy

  • Gregg

    I love Ron Paul until he goes all isolationist on foreign policy. Iran having nukes… no problem. That’s where he loses me.

    • Anonymous

      While I don’t agree with the extent of Ron Paul’s plan to pull our defenses back to our boarders, but I do see some of his point.

      Do we really need to protect Europe from Europe?  We have 54,000 troops in Germany for heavens sake!

      Do we really need to protect South Korea from North Korea? 28,000 troops ?

      Do we really need to protect Japan with 40,000 troops?

      Do we really need to protect Italy and the UK from Europe with 10,000 troops each?

      The truth is we outspend the rest of the world in military spending because we have become the worlds policeman.  

      Why do we have to pay for protection of foreign countries?

      I would propose any country that votes against our interest in the UN more than 25% of the time gets no protection or presence from our troops!

      • Gregg

        All very good points, I can’t argue with any of them except for a quibble about being the worlds policeman. The problem for me is Ron Paul doesn’t stop there.

        I could go for Paul/Petraeus.

        • Anonymous

          That makes as much sense as pairing him with Nader. 

          • Gregg

            There’s a rumor.

          • Dave

            That would blow the lid off the place….

        • Anonymous

          If we are not acting as the worlds police man, then why do we have troops in so many contries around the world, and why do we spend more than every other country  in national defense?

          • Gregg

            I’m not saying we aren’t but I’d say to a certain extent we must. Libya is a good example where our leadership was missed and IMHO it caused more bloodshed. My thing is the world happens no matter what and it’s better to have a say than not. It’s like the Dulfur report said of terrorist, they were at war with us long before we were at war with them. I don’t think it’s possible to check out, that’s all. And Paul said in an early debate let Iran have nukes. To me that’s unacceptable but again, I agree with your points. And the quibble was just a quibble.

      • DPW

        “Do we really need to protect Europe from Europe?”

        Historically, yes.

        “Do we really need to protect South Korea from North Korea?”

        Historically, yes.

        “Do we really need to protect Japan with 40,000 troops?”

        Historically, yes.

        “Why do we have to pay for protection of foreign countries?”

        We don’t.  We do so because we see it as being in our best interest.

        • Modavations

          Ya but,how bout our allies pay a reasonable amount.

      • Modavations

        We’re an Empire,but our allies should also pay.

    • Politiks
    • Ikkybeer

      Gregg,

      If a country wanted to pursue an isolationist policy, they would isolate themselves from the rest of the world with very little or no contact or trade and certainly not meddling in other countries’ wars. However if a country did want to trade extensively in products, tourism, culture, etc. yet avoid getting entangled in wars and world policing, Ron Paul is completely in favor of that, which is properly called non-interventionism.  Isolationism is the term that interventionists will falsely attribute to non-interventionism in the hopes that most people will not appreciate the huge difference.

      As far as understanding the Iran/nukes issue, maybe you or someone else can direct us to any law that denies any country from possessing nuclear weapons.  Once you get past that issue, then RP’s position is quite understandable.

  • Anonymous

    How are the media going to ignore Ron Paul when the entire hour is devoted to him?

  • Anonymous

    Another reason Ron Paul is pretty popular is revealed by this poll:  PEOPLE FEAR BIG GOV’T MORE THAN BIG BUSINESS OR LABOR…

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70318.html

  • mary elizabeth.

    Perhaps we need to be more evolved as a species i.e more honest, less ego,  more health conscious, more loving before Ron Paul’s vision can work without destroying each other.

    • Ray in VT

      Like the idea of a communist society, libertarianism wouldn’t really work either.  Both expect too much from people.

  • KYGeorge

    Finally.  It will be nice to hear about an honest person with good ideas, and he’s actually running for president.

    It isn’t isolationist to notice that it is a bad idea to take out loans to help other countries when your own states are bankrupt.  Let these other countries apply for statehood, and trade with them in the meantime.  Nothing isolates you from others like blowing up their family members, and we have our warriors ready to blow people up in nearly every country in the world.  Trading with someone is very far from isolating yourself from them.

  • Sam

    Where does Ron Paul stand on supporting public radio, art and educational programs and planned parenthood?

    • Worried for the country(MA)

      LOL

    • Modavations

      Like most laissez faire types,pay for your own playgrounds.How many poor guys listen to NPR.How many poor guys go to Symphony!!

  • Worried for the country(MA)

    Ron Paul had a shining moment in the debate when he suggested Newt give the Freddie MAC money back on moral grounds.

    • Modavations

      How do you feel about Morse,Frankie Raines and Jamie Gorelik taking over 100million in commission from Fannie.Every phoney-baloney mortgage they sold,paid them a commission

      • Anonymous

        You realize that the  “phoney-baloney” system you rage against every day was the sole basis for any positive economic performance during the Bush administration, don’t you?  That’s $10 trillion that was all make believe, except for those who pocketed commissions and fees from the process, who you demand be allowed to keep their booty and pay the lowest tax rate in history on it.   And I have never seen anyone on this site defend the actions you complain about.  Who are you arguing with?

        • Modavations

          I voted for neither Bush or Obama. I condone neither.Ronaldus and Billy C are my favs.A question lad,who would spend your money best,You,or the Feds.Privitise everything.Let the churches ministrate Welfare

          • Anonymous

            It’s not as easy as either/or.  I think a lot of matters are better addressed by collective action, be it based on religion, neighborhood, city or country. 

  • Anonymous

    I would like to see On Point spend a show on the mechanics of the Republican nomination process.  Changes were made to how delegates will be allocated.  If this race isn’t decided in the early primaries this will be important. 

  • http://traditionalliberalism.blogspot.com/ classicalliberal

    He is the only one I would vote for. I just can’t get myself to support or vote for any other candidate on either side. I suspect other Ron Paul supporters feel the same way. The good thing is that there is a growing movement of “blue Republicans,” independents, and libertarians that have been adding to the base.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C2STBLZJK4VKQBV27DVQX3I6CU FAX68

      You will vote for Ron Paul? my god help you

      • Anonymous

        It’s called a democracy. You don’t have to like it nor do I but at least this person is going to vote.

      • Anonymous

        You’re right.  We should continue down the path we’ve been taking with Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama.  Different rhetoric, same policies.

        • http://traditionalliberalism.blogspot.com/ classicalliberal

          Precisely my thoughts.

    • Susan for Ron Paul 2012

      You will vote for Ron Paul?  Obviously God has already helped you to the understanding our founders had. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C2STBLZJK4VKQBV27DVQX3I6CU FAX68

    Please Ron Paul IS NOT GOING TO WIN. period!

    • Modavations

      Hilary said that about Obama

  • http://www.profitandentropy.com richard goldwater

    Ask your guests what scientific evidence is there for a free market?  What science says the law of supply and demand is valid?  Even if it applied  to the agrarian economy of 1776, when Adam Smith wrote, how could it apply to super-computed, high frequency trading (HFT)? There is no scientific or historical evidence to believe in the Free market.

  • Jasoturner

    The Paul-bots will be in heaven.  You’ve given them a nice gift, Tom.

    • Modavations

      Are you aware that over 50% of America is Laissez Faire and we pay for NPR too.I got nnews son,we’re here to liberate NPR

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul is going to own Iowa!!! After that who knows.

    • Anonymous

      Wont mean a thing. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1816544 Dan Trindade

    When listening to Ron Paul talk about his vision of where America should be headed, I can’t help but feel conflicted. On the one hand, I admire his resolve and his willingness to discuss politically uncomfortable foreign policy issues such as our tacit support for Israel or our myriad bases across the globe on the national political stage. These are issues that, though uncomfortable to many politicians, are issues that should I think be discussed seriously instead of protected dogmatically. On the other, I am appalled at where some of his ideas would take us as a country. Axe the Department of Education? Axe Social Security? The implications of just these two (50 completely independent and inconsistent education standards nationwide? Ageing Americans with no safety net what so ever?) are enough to give a student of public policy nightmares.

    • Anonymous

      Public education left to the states could possibly be more effecient and cheaper. Personally I don’t feel like I should be obligated to pay taxes for the department of education since public has had absolutely nothing to do with my life

      • Ray in VT

        The education of our nation’s children affects all of us.  If we don’t have an education population, then how can we expect to complete in a global economy.  I would suggest that it certainly has a lot to do with your life.

        • Modavations

          Are you for vouchers?Do you realize that this year, american students had their worst scores ever in all 7 disciplines.Are you aware that only 30% of 3rd graders read at proficiency.Schools need competition not teachers unions.Stick to reading,writing and arithmetic and I’ll teach the Johnny’s got two daddies,stuff

        • Anonymous

          So you think in the last 25 yrs education has improved? NOT. I dare you to find a bunch of 7th graders who know more about a library than the latest android game, or better yet a bunch that even know how to spell it.

          Teachers are so busy with federal  mandates they don’t have time to teach. No one left behind my a$$ they are all behind.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1816544 Dan Trindade

        While I see where you are coming from in some respects, I have to disagree. Without national education standards, education levels will vary widely from state to state. How can an 8th grade education in say New York being equivalent to a High School Diploma in say Wyoming be good for the country? How can we maintain unity as a nation, let alone our competitiveness internationally, if we do not have at least some level of educational equality?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1816544 Dan Trindade

        While I see where you are coming from in some respects, I have to disagree. Without national education standards, education levels will vary widely from state to state. How can an 8th grade education in say New York being equivalent to a High School Diploma in say Wyoming be good for the country? How can we maintain unity as a nation, let alone our competitiveness internationally, if we do not have at least some level of educational equality?

  • Joe72172

    Thank God for Ron Paul.  The only anti war candidate on either side of party lines. 

  • Kathy

    Why doesn’t Mr. Paul move to Somalia? Their current governmental “system” seems to be pretty much what he advocates.

    • TweedleDumDee

      What crap.  Spell out your demonization so we can understand the depth of your misinformation and lack of understanding of liberty and rule of Law

    • Chirotom5

      And maybe you should move to North Korea! It’s a socialist haven!

  • Susan for Ron Paul 2012

    Read and wonder “What has Government Done to our Money?” and you’ll understand Ron Paul

  • Sara in VT

    I am very interested in the idea RP poses but would like him to speak about how he would get to where he wants to go, a few examples, where would he start?  I work at a homeless family shelter and and quite confident that if many people were dropped from benefits they would spiral downward.  I would love to see the beginning of a proposal to help people become self sufficient using ideas that have worked and research.

    • Anonymous

      Under a Ron Paul administration they would get nothing.
      Nor would there be corporate subsidies. However, it will not happen in the next election.
      Income taxes gone, not very likely.

      • Ray in VT

        I don’t foresee it happening ever.  Who wants to go back to the 18th century?

  • Ray in VT

    I think that many of the young people who are supporting this libertarian worldview are just grossly uninformed.  Let them live in a society without the social safety net, food safety or environmental laws for a while and let them see how brutal a laissez-faire society really is.  They’ll change their tune.

    • Kathy

      Agreed. We had a world without social safety nets and consumer protection. Libertarian fairy dust didn’t fix the problems, progressive legislation in the early 20th century did.

      • Dave

        With respect, it’s folks like you who are grossly uninformed.  Talk of Libertarian fairy dust? How you call the Big Government enabled, Discretion instead of Rule of Law lack of enforcement, Crony Finance fiasco a Libertarian problem shows the height of ignorance.

        Fed funny money>Bubbles>Wall St Profits>Debt>Free interest money for bankers>Wars>Repeat.

        You have to want to understand the system and what Paul is explaining to hear it.

      • Modavations

        You’ve replaced the nuclear family with the Welfare State.You’ve replaced the charity of the church with the profession Social Worker.You’ve made poverty a racket.You’ve spent 5 trillion since LBJ war on poverty and things are worse then ever.

      • Anonymous

        You would consider our problems fixed?  I disagree, and the evidence abounds.  How can you consider our current state as “fixed?”

    • Anonymous

      I bet we agree on most things…but….it is only a fact, reality, that under the FDA food poisonings are commonplace, thousands per year, deaths, widespread, etc.

      What if there was no FDA?

      Well, everyone would pay a lot more attention to their food sources, if they believed there was no guard dog.

      This is how regulation works — safety is improved temporarily, and then fades and dissapears, leaving the population disarmed and *more* vulnerable than before.

      What is the alternative for progressives?

      Read my main comment.

    • Anonymous

      Who do you think writes the food safety and environmental laws?

      I am neither young nor am I uninformed, and I disagree with your statement, sir.

  • Susan for Ron Paul 2012

    Read “The Law” too and you’ll understand him even more.

  • Bart

    Right off the Bat ! And tom misrepresents Ron’s message ! “Social Security Gone, medicare Gone.” Wrong ! Ron is the protector of Social Security from those Politicians who rutinely “borrow” from the fund. Ron whats to PRESERVE S.S. & Medicare for those who have paid into it and those who Need it ! He would merely give young people the ability to opt out !  He would phase out the NEED, NOT pull the rug out from under those who have been Hurt by our Current Crony Capitalism .

    • Ray in VT

      And if young people opt out, then eventually it goes under.  I would call Tom’s point perhaps over-simplified but ultimately correct.

      • TFRX

        Yep. Can’t talk about Medicare or SocSec in any real seriousness by ignoring that.

        These are programs for all classes of Americans. When the well-off are allowed to leave because they “don’t need it”, for some bunkum crap, then the privatizeers start their PR war about how “XXX is just another program for poor, shiftless, lazy riffraff”.

        All for the K-Streeters to get their mitts on those government-provided healthcare dollars or SocSec funds.

  • Kevincplew

    How can Dr. Paul be a libertarian and want to pass a life at conception bill? Wouldn’t abortion be a decision between an individual and their Doctor?

    • Joe72172

      Ron Paul doesn’t believe that federal tax money should be spent on abortion but would not pass a federal opposing it.  He believes that each state should set their own laws, just as the constitution says….state laws trump federal.  I am pro choice but dont believe that someone who is pro life should be billed for abortions.

  • HK

    what liberty is there in outlawing reproductive freedom and freedom of sexual orientation?  paul may be a fiscal libertarian, but isolationism and social regression is most certainly not the way forward.

    • Anonymous

      And don’t forget his racism. 

      • Susan for Ron Paul 2012

        give me a break!  Do you know how old and discounted that accusation is? 

        • Modavations

          John only votes Communist-socialist.It’s a knee jerk reply.He thinks Move On and MSNBC are legitimate news sources

        • Anonymous

          Does Paul favor legislation prohibiting racial, etc., discrimination, or believe it should be left to the individual and market to decide?  I think that’s the practical issue.

          • Dave

            We need to legislate against Aholes right?

          • TFRX

            Nice way to out yourself as a Lunchcounter Libertarian.

            I always figured you for the segment of society who is privileged enough to think everybody get all those rights. Now we have proof.

          • Anonymous

            I don’t understand your point.   I think there’s a difference between using the “N” word at the tavern and refusing to rent your property to someone because of their race.  And I think the power of the government should be used to address only the latter. 

    • Anonymous

      Ron Paul consistently speaks out agaisnt discrimination saying people shouldn’t be put into groups. Hes even spoken in defense of gay soldiers and minorities and otherwise who get abused in the war on drugs

      • Dave

        Yes but knee jerk Dems prefer their Red Herrings to the truth.  It helps maintain their self-righteousness complexes.

  • Modavations

    The reason I love Rand Paul is because of his stand on the Gold Standard.There is no need for the Fed if it is in place.If dollar holders think you are running a lousy budget,they exchange dollars for gold.It keeps the Solons honest and economic policy sound.The reason he’s unelectable is becausse his eyes roll around in his head.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Ron Paul has good ideas, but he fails to recognize that some problems have to be solved by the whole of society working together.  I’d feel better about him if he’d show some ability to see the difference.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul should explain how his “Libertarian” views square with his stance on the Right to Choose. He can keep his laws off my body.  He’s not a Libertarian.

    • Anonymous

      Ron Paul would still leave abortion up to the states regardless of his views on it. Ron Paul is the only one who would actually defend states rights to medical marijuana and to end the facist war on drugs

    • Dave

      You miss the whole point.  He DOESN”T want the Federal Government choosing that for you.   

      • TFRX

        And he doesn’t mind state governments getting in the way of Debbie and her body and her doctor.

        Debbie gets to be less of a citizen depending on what state she’s in.

        (And, please, no bunkum about how she can always move.)

      • Anonymous

        Why is it “libertarian” to get the federal government out of these matters but let state and local government do whatever they choose about them?  Sounds like a shell game to me and others who remember what happened under the banner of “state’s rights” in the past.

        • Dave

          The more local, the more accountable, and the smaller the power.

          The Fed is too removed and too powerful to be trusted.

          See Financial Crisis.

          • Anonymous

            Individuals often have more rights under a large central government than they do under local governments.  People had more rights under strong kings than they did when the local nobles controlled their lives.  Blacks did under federal expansion of civil rights than they did under the supposedly more accountable local leaders. 

          • Dave

            We know you favor benevolent dictatorship over constitutional self-government.

            America fought a revolution against the Monarchy.

            Been there, done that.

          • Anonymous

            How well did the Articles of Confederation work out?  A central government doesn’t have to mean monarchy.  How many rights will most people have when wealth accumulates as it would without government to balance business? 

  • DPW

    Anyone who wants to go back to the gold standard is dangerously stupid.  We don’t have anything close to the gold necessary to underpin the global economy, and I just don’t get the fetish with this soft, shiny metal.

    dan
    boston, ma

  • Modavations

    Ron Paul and Ralph Nader are like yesteryears Dodo.Why?They’re honest men

  • AC

    I’m not sure about him; it sounds a little too extreme. i don’t trust extremes or extremists….

    • Anonymous

      How about the current status quo of putting our country trillions of dollars into debt with no budget cuts and waging endless wars? That sounds pretty extreme to me

      • AC

        What he seems to want is to simplistic to solve the issues you mention; it just doesn’t feel like a lot of ‘thought’ has gone into possible consequences. But, I’m not an idealist myself – i’m boring and practical, i could be wrong…

        • DrTom

          Say you have cancer…that’s one extreme. I assume from your comment that instead of having no cancer (the other extreme) you choose the middle ground and have only a little bit of cancer.

          • AC

            pricisely; i do like my caffeine in the morning…and the occasional potato chip. I think everybody has a little bit of cancer lurking, no?
            Also, don’t forget that the cure is sometimes worse than the disease (& I’ll vouch for that!!)…..

  • mattle

    What is wrong with believing that the government should follow it’s own laws? 

  • TFRX

    Ah, now we get to all those things that white guys (straight, raised Christian, etc) enjoy as birthrights where as other people are still looking for in some places in this country.

    What’s with the idea that it’s not the federal government’s role to keep, for example those “Christianists” from getting between a woman and her doctor in Missletucky?

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      White guy’s birthright?  Where do I sign up?

      • TFRX

        You’re already a card-carrying member. Unless you get passed up by a cabbie for your skin color, or pulled over by a cop because you’re white, as two examples.

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

          Oh, please, that’s the best that you can do?  There is no such thing as white privilege.  There’s the privilege of money, absolutely.  But what advantage do I have by my skin color?  None.

          • TFRX

            Pfft. That’s the obvious, off the top of my head. As a fish doesn’t know what water is, spending its whole life in it, white guys don’t know what it’s like living in white culture and power structures.

            Let’s get some people who aren’t white to weigh in on this.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

            I’ve seen this white privilege thing being tried too many times.  Handwringers couldn’t get me to feel guilty about slavery, since I never owned a slave, so they had to hunt up another reason.

          • TFRX

            Just slavery? That’s all? You’re smarter than that.

            From one white guy to another: Let’s get some people who aren’t white to weigh in on this.

          • Steve__T

            If you had an understanding of the differences in peoples of color, you would understand that there is a privileged unspoken rule, white first.

            Don’t feel guilty about it, just know it does exist. Weather you exorcize  your right to it or not.

    • Modavations

      Privatize everything.The Feds. should guard the borders and act as referees.All Welfare should be ministrated through the Church and Synagogue(?)

      • TFRX

        Sounds like a guy who’s never been on the losing side of a religious squabble.

      • Ray in VT

        Do you want to send this country into the toilet?  Maybe we can go back to the literal poor farm while we’re at it?

        • Modavations

          Why don’t you tell that to all the farmers in VT.Or are you a proponent of the Industrial,mega farm

      • manchesterbythesea1%

        hey modavations, do you have a job?

        • Modavations

          Jewelery sales,loose gemstone sales,Indian Textile sales.I’m on the road two days a week and on the phones 6 days a week.While I’m typing,I’m taking orders,listening to Laura Ingram,and watching CNBC.Laissez Faire types,being of higher IQ,can do it all.I couldn’t care less about what you do

  • Dave

    Great show Tom,

    Can you have your guests address the following comments from Ralph Nader supporting Paul’s movement?

    I think this represents an important reform path forward.

    Nader:
    “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” 

    http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/28/ralph-nader-hearts-ron-paul-ha

  • Not Huben (so don’t blame him)

    “Libert”arianism*:  All the Freedom that money can buy.

    http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html

    Maybe if they were willing to part with Statist creations like limited liability, bankruptcy, corporate personhood, patents, copyright, other intellectual “property”, the ability to give things to people after you’re dead through wills I’d consider them more sincere.

    Maybe if they were willing to avoid strict Coasianism and admit that initial conditions can determine outcomes, I’d respect them more, intellectually.

    *Allow me my cant—they’ve appropriated “libertarian”, formerly meaning “anarchist”, just as lukewarm social democrats (like me) interested in racial justice appropriated “liberal”…but we have at least have the excuse of having a more elastic notion of property rights, so some appropriation (by ex-laisser faireists who decided we needed some government interference) is to be expected of us.  “Propertarian minarchism” is a more accurate description, especially if you feel (as do I) that most actual persons would end up with much less practical liberty in such a world, at least until our technical level becomes reasonable enough that all the necessities of life were too cheap to meter.

    • DrTom

      I’m pretty sure that most Libertarians are against most of what you just listed. Maybe you should get your facts straight!

  • Modavations

    Ron Paul is for School Vouchers.Educate the ghetto kids and 75% will suceed financially.An education is the key to success.To Democrats,School Vouchers are like a “cross”flashed in the face of Dracula.

    • Ray in VT

      School vouchers, bah.  Another “free market” approach that won’t work.

      • Modavations

        A Social Workers sure route to unemployement.An educated populace.

        • TFRX

          Someone who needs psychoactive meds (which you claim) shouldn’t be so blatantly in denial about mental health professionals.

          • Modavations

            Yes it’s 10:00,so let your immature innanity rip

          • Modavations

            A profession that would prescibe Adderol to a kid, is criminal.There is no ADHD,it’s bad parenting.But of course,when you figure that out,you’re out a job.

          • TFRX

            “There is no ADHD.”

            Who to listen to: You, with your tenuous hold on reality, or professionals?

            Tough choice. Toooough choice.

  • Dabney Braggart

    Added benefit:  since she excommunicated the Libertarian Party, supporting it and the Pauls makes Ayn Rand cry.

  • http://profiles.google.com/dixiepassion DIXIE PASSION

    I love Ron Paul

  • Kyle Jarger

    How can he be libertarian, and yet “big government” and anti-choice when it comes to abortion?  Oh that’s right; shrink the goverment and get them out of people’s life choices…unless its an issue he disagrees with!

    • Anonymous

      No, abortion would still be left up to the states under a Ron Paul administration, he has said this many times before

      • Kyle Jarger

        That sounds like anti-choice to me.  So if I happen to live in a state where there are lots of religous zealots, I would get no choice…you call that choice?

      • Dave

        People like Kyle, who have one valid view about embryos, cannot handle the freedom of others to have different views about embryos, questions that have no objective answer.

        So he takes the benevolent dictator view over the live and let live view, and chooses Fed power over People power to make it possible.

        The fact is there would/will always be states where choice would prevail while others might have “life” prevail.

        • Kyle Jarger

          “cannot handle the freedom of others to have different views about embryos” Wrong! You are welcome to your different view and your freedom, just don’t force others to live according to your views.  If you don’t believe in abortion, don’t have one; no one is forcing you to have one.   It’s not a libertarian stance to force another to live according to your view, especially when it comes to questions that have no objective anwer.

          • Dave

            I agree with you, but how can you outlaw other people from thinking that embryos are human-enough to not be “killed” except in the most dire situation?  If enough people see it that way to self-govern/legislate that way, and there is no objective answer, it would seem they should be free to govern themselves that way.

            What if one’s philosophy, understanding of reality, said there was no objective difference between rocks, plants, animals and people, and just as one can smash a rock, one should be able to smash a person. It’s just a bunch of molecules arranged in space. Why can do we let people tell that person murder is wrong?  Why force that on them?

            There is no objective answer, and so  the majority legislative rule sets the bounds, like it or not.

            Don’t really want to argue this tough topic, not worth derailing the liberty concept.  

            I think liberty is pro-choice myself.

        • Anonymous

          Those “life” states are going to need a lot more homicide detectives to investigate the role expectant mothers may have played in their miscarriages. 

  • Shelly Karlin

    With such ideological views, what are the chances of him being an effectual president when congress would resist the extreme changes he suggests?

    • Dave

      It’s so funny/disturbing when people call freedom, “ideological”.  Giving as much liberty to the people to choose what they think/want, as OPPOSED to enforcing ideas on everyone is the OPPOSITE of ideological rule.

      Its the social planners and benevolent dictator types who are the ideologues.  And it leads to friction with those who don’t want ideas shoved down their throat.

      That is why liberty is a peace movement.

      http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headline/diversity-ends-rules/

    • Joe72172

      They all take an oath to obey the constitution and Ron Paul will demand what most have ignored.

  • Dave

    His current popularity has more to do with education.  This philosophy has been steadily growing each year for a long time, and this is just another year in a series of increased growth.  It is just starting to reach a large mass of people who listen enough to get it.  It’s pretty simple, it is just becoming more popular because people are becoming more educated.  Once you are on board, you are on for life, and the message has never differed for 40 years or more.  His ideas are based in reason rather than popularity contests and so once people get it, they don’t stray from this line of thought.  Also, it isn’t just about Ron Paul, it is a philosophy and that doesn’t end with Ron Paul winning or losing.

    Plus, the other guys are a bunch of liars, cheaters, war-mongers or flip-floppers, he’s the only option in any party if you don’t like those other types.

    • Bruce

      He does seem to inspire his supporters like some kind of cult hero reminiscent of libertarian icon, Ayn Rand who also atttracted youthful worshippers. And as with Rand, I suspect this popularity among young people has less to do with them “becoming more educated” and more to do with their typically narcissistic dreams of omnipotence and immortality.  As we know many youngsters view themselves as invincible–why would they support social welfare or private/public partnerships to invest in health, education, infrastrucure, research, etc., all of which is necessary to creating a civil society and competing in the global economy. 

      Of course, a little life experience is usually enough to disabuse ourselves of our adolescent dreams of omnipotence.  And in the end, even Rand, the disciple of small government and unregulated markets took Social Security and Medicare.

      The hyprocisy of those who tell us “do as I say, not as I do” aside, Ron Paul’s policy prescriptions would usher us back to the unregulated, rapacious capitalism that was largely responsible for the economic collapse in 2008.
      Does anyone seriously believe or maintain with a straight face that the financial and housing markets were over-regulated in the period leading up to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and subsequent recession? 

      There is nothing new in the laissez-faire, states’ rights rhetoric of Ron Paul or any other fringe conservative.  The libertarian nirvana that such a view evokes is not too appealing to me; it woud turn the clock back to the Jim Crow 1950′s or the 1920′s with its extreme income inequality and conspicuous consumption or even worse to the Antebellum South.  These are not times and places the majority of even marginally educated people want to go. 

      • Chirotom5

        It’s hypocritical to get paid back what she had been paying into her whole life? It was her money to begin with! Don’t be ridiculous!

  • Lyndon F. Charles Jr.

    As children we’re constantly told that honesty is the best policy. Why does it then annoy us as adults when someone is as honest as Ron Paul?

    • Anonymous

      Where is the proof that he is honest?  He denied that he was responsible for the racist content of his newsletter. 

      • Joe72172

        Come on John…is that the best you can do.  Ron Paul is no racist and that issue was put to rest awhile ago.  Don’t you think if there was any meat on that bone that it would be a debate topic.

    • Ray in VT

      His honesty doesn’t annoy me.  I can agree with him on some issues, but on most things I just think that he’s dead wrong.

      • Dave

        He wants to give YOU the most opportunity to choose what you think is right and want! That’s the whole point of liberty, as long as you don’t harm others.

        You benevolent dictators just can’t handle the lack of control of the masses to think just like you.

        • Ray in VT

          I can and do think whatever I want.  The masses can also think whatever they want.  What I don’t want in anarchy, which is awfully close to what a pure libertarian vision leads towards.

    • Anonymous

      I expect I’m like a lot of others who respect him for being singularly honest but strongly disagree with many of his positions.

  • Jaimemott

    Ron Paul is a candidate who dislikes the “government’s” involvement in lifestyle issues such as gay marriage however it was mentioned on the show that he is Pro Life. Is there any larger lifestyle issue than choosing to bring a child into your family and the world. It’s always frustrating when candidates pander for the religious vote.

    • Anonymous

      He doesn’t pander but maybe its politically a smart move. Ether way tho Ron Paul would still leave abortion up to the states.

      • Ray in VT

        I’m sure that my female relatives in Mississippi aren’t too eager to see that happen.

    • TFRX

      I wish he were pandering.

      I really think he’s afraid of the Federal government exercising power in this manner. It’s very pie-in-the-sky stuff that ignores the real world, and only seems to come from people who don’t need the government to protect their particular individual rights.

      After all the power the Federal govt has now, to affect our lives for good or bad, Paul seems to have an outsized worry about it using its power to make sure that some individual in the minority of their race, creed, orientation, or something gets to have all the liberty in the world to fight, singlehandedly or with whatever small percentage of the population they make up, the “Valuistas” in their state capitol.

      That’s damn close to tyranny of the majority.

    • Joe72172

      Ron Paul has delivered over 4000 babies and he is a Christian.  His beliefs are his own.  No pandering here.  He will not pass a federal law on personal choices/freedoms.  Exactly the opposite.

  • Modavations

    In ancient Greece, where this all started,they had no govt..The free citizens(including freed slaves),met in a qurom and voted policy.It worked fine for 600 yrs. and produced mankinds greatest society

    • Anonymous

      Great idea, lets go back to the Greek ideal of government.
      While we are at it we could also go back to horses and swords, shields and spears. Mostly made of bronze.

      • Dave

        Nah, lets just finish our evolution toward the China model of Authoritarian Capitalism.

        • Ray in VT

          Well, we do seem to be trying to race Chinese labor to the bottom…

      • AC

        never having to bathe…sigh…those were the days…..

        • Modavations

          Ancient Greece,who you seem to find contemptible,figured out everything.We’ve only perfected the science.You have healthrproblems.For whom did they name the Hippocratic Oath.Here’s a tip.Whatever Jeffe says,take the absolute opposite stand and you’ll be a success.

          • AC

            uh oh – another bad writing experience. why on earth would i find ancient greece contemptible? Pythagorean has been my friend since i was 8!!!

          • Modavations

            Bravo

          • AC

            i was thinking mid-evil, not greece….

          • Gregg

            I just built a new hay barn. He helped me square it: 30,40,50.

          • AC

            that is a perfect right triangle!! my good buddy Pythy again….<3

      • msgaga

        Get your own blog Jeff and Modavations too!

      • Modavations

        I maintain that Greece between 750Bc to 50Bc has been unsurpossed.They figured everything out and Rome merely knocked them off.Technology has advanced,but Greece figured out all the basics.Remember Pythagoras,perhaps Euclid,how ’bout Plato,I can go on.Modern Greece is a basket case because they are ruled by our modern day Democrat Party

    • Ray in VT

      Hmmmm.  The citizens coming together to vote and things and make collective decisions.  That sounds a lot like government to me.

      • Modavations

        minus the layer, upon layer, upon layer ,of hacks.Of course the Left prefers dictatorship,which I suppose is more efficient

  • Dave

    Tom, could you have Mr. Gillespie comment on the relationship between classical Rule of Law and liberty, and how they support each other?

  • Michiganjf

    Tom and guests,

       Despite some grudging admiration for him, there is nothing new or original coming from Ron Paul.

    Paul espouses nearly the entire traditional Libertarian platform, right down the line.

    I first became familiar with Libertarianism when Ed Clark ran for President in 1980 and put the political philosophy of the Party on the national map for the first time.

    … Ron Paul’s positions on almost every issue are identical to those of Clark in 1980.

    • MICHIGANJF

      PAUL IS MOST FUNDAMENTALLY A LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE, NOT A REPUBLICAN.

      • Heaviest Cat

        not much difference really. Both favor big business at teh expense of democracy and the average citizen.

      • Joe72172

        Your right.  Today’s Republicans are the same as Democrats.  Ron Paul is a true Republican.  This is a republic after all.  The constitution was written to limit the size and control of government

  • Shawn Fitzpatrick

    For the longest time the mainstream media has seemed to not take Dr, Paul seriously.  Through the majority of the early debates little was said of him.

    • Anonymous

      The wisdom of the media marketplace.  Why is public NPR covering him?

      • Dave

        J_o_h_n, you’d make a great dictator.

        • heaviest cat

          what’s the matter ,Dave? anybody who questions market values is apotential “dictator”?

      • heaviest cat

        because NPR sold out to the market about 10years ago,John. Just listen to all the defacto commercials on Morn. Ed. fro everything from video games to the Fall TV season. Where’s the PUBLIC in “public” radio.

  • Rievler

    Oh God. Out come the crazies. RP is a buffoon that used to seen as such (shouldn’t elected from Texas provide sufficient warning?). Our politics has become so sclerotic and infantile because we the people pay only cursory attention to it. When idiots start to pay attention, they fall for snake oil conspiratorial salesmen like Paul.
    Consistency is the hobgobblin…

    • Shawn_D75

      Seen as such by a bunch of people who drove the world economy off a cliff.  You can get in that car if you want to get back in with all those chuckleheads.

      Ron Paul is popular mainly on colleges and among the more educated.  Others prefer Obama or Gingrich, look things up before you start talking like an idiot.

      • Rievler

        Why would you assume that those who think RP and his many of his followers are economic/political simpletons had anything to do with “driving the economy off a cliff?” There are more than two views of the world. I’m sure you’d call me a liberal if we were to have a beer and talk economics/politics, but that doesn’t mean that policies that I would support were responsible for our economic problems. I haven’t “been in that car” so to speak. As to whether college students are necessarily more intellegent or wiser that the average Joe, I’d suggest consulting the definition of sophomoric.

    • Dave

      As opposed to the DNC/GOP crazies who delivered us our financial swindle/crisis?

  • Marjie from montreal

    If he’s going to get rid of so much government, what would be done in the case of another Gulf oil spill?

    • Ray in VT

      I’m sure that the free market will take care of it.  It did so well to combat things like acid rain.

    • Ti

      For one thing, there wouldn’t be a liability cap for BP. Also everyone affected on the coast could sue the pants off of BP.

    • Heaviest Cat

      Absolutely nothing Marjie. THat’s why he wants to get rid of so much government. pesky regulations protecting or cleaning up the environment, or protecting the rights of workers and other citizens only put a dent in the profit margin. THis show void of any critics of Paul compromises NPR’s integrity.

      • Dave

        Your own lack of integrity is no excuse for claiming the rest of us have none, and thus need to live under a benevolent dictatorship.

        • heaviest cat

          Davy, Davy DAVY,i never claimed you or anyone  on this blog lacked integrity. I clamed that NPR does. and what’sthis  “benevolent dictatorship” about? If you mean socialism, then you don’t understand socialism.

    • Shawn

      Those who live on the coast could sue BP more easily if Ron Paul, or a libertarian type, had his way, that is why BP is sending more cash to Romney and Obama.

    • Dave

      Uhhhh, BP hires disaster clean up firms to clean up the mess.

      Clean up your own messes. That’s a responsibility issue 101. Why would libertarians be against that?

      If  you are trying to smear libertarians as externality free-riders, you haven’t researched the issue.

  • Steve

    Are Ron Paul’s reforms really even possible from a logistics viewpoint?  In reality, wouldn’t the president need the support of congress to eliminate executive departments and programs?  Why do we take any of these presidential candidates seriously when they talk about cutting cabinet divisions?

  • Sara in VT

    What does this guy mean by a little hurt?  Some starvation, homelessness, people with out enough money to heat their homes?  What exactly, he seems to be saying this like it doesn’t really matter.  

    • Heaviest Cat

      Sara because to Ron Paul and others like him, starvation, homelessness or cold homes don’t matter since they don’t interfere with the corporate bottom line.

    • Jack

      You are acting as a demagogue.  When government is limited, people don’t just die.  You seem to assume that government sparks the very flames in peoples’ fireplaces.

    • Julia C

      It isn’t about the corporate bottom line, large corporations do not support Paul, they support Obama and Romney -look it up.  Actually, those large corporations could not have gotten so large without the help of the government through crony capitalism.  Sprawl was a creation of people like Roosevelt and those who believe in manipulating our markets like Keynes.  Without artificially low non-market rates, we would not have had sprawl, and wars about oil, and the related oil spills in the first place.  People would have been living within their means, and the entire suburban thing was financed through massive global debt.  A libertarian world is more green that the one supported by the green party because people are only allowed to grow as the market allows.  This also relates to wars and population.  Having a minimal government will not make things perfect, but will make things much better in the long run.

      • Dave

        Stop, stop with the truth! Your’e ruining the Marxist narrative!

      • heaviest cat

        Julia ,if large corps. don’t support Paul, it’s probably because he is opposed to wars of occupation that are necessary to control another country’s resources or that transalte into profitable weapons sales.

  • Chuck

    Obama said the economy was not his fault and compared his efforts to steering a ship in a stormy sea.  Well, with this statement Obama declared that libertarians are correct.  He implied that the government can do nothing much in the end to change the economy (the stormy sea), it is a force of nature.  Whatever he has done, he can not change the economy and make things better in the end.  Obama acknowledges the free market is the way to go, and that it always corrects itself, but none-the-less he is paid to oppose it for some reason.

    • TFRX

      Remember when Republicans used to believe in governance? Our mainstream press still pretends they do.

      You’re forgetting the role of all the GOP, whose declared role is to aim the cannons at the hull of the ship of state.

  • http://profiles.google.com/insidiom Christopher Dawson

    Jaimemott – A candidate is allowed to have their own beliefs in regard to the right to life.  I personally disagree with RPs Pro-Life stance.  However, he delivered babies for a living and I think that if anyone should carry the Pro-Life flag, it should be him.  Moreover, he’s stated that he doesn’t want to impose his views on abortion to all of the states in the Union.  Lastly, he has also stated that in order for him to accomplish anything as President, he must have support from Congress and the People.  He is the only candidate who isn’t pretending he has a magic, political wand that aligns reality to his whim.  

    —…Continue to discount Ron Paul and call him crazy.  It obviously is having NO effect on his campaign or potential supporters.  Quite the opposite, actually.

  • James

    Thanks! I am very pro Ron Paul!

  • Diane

    Correcting things quickly and immediately may mean many people will be moving in with family, and become poorer.  However, waiting for the correction means billions will eventually die in a huge global war when this mess is finally forced to snap.  I would prefer being poor for a while after cutting government spending and putting that spending back into the hands of individuals who do not pay $6,000 for a hammer.

  • Bart

    More Confusion. We don’t HAVE a “Free Market” in America, we have “Crony Capitalism.”  The fear of “deregulation” is mis-guided. First of all there has already BEEN a Bi-Partisan, Establishment Politician deregulation of Wall St. over the past 35 years. But the Real problem is lack of ENFORCEMENTof basic Illegality! Fraud is rampant and No One gets charged  much less prosecuted. Wouldn’t a man of Ron Paul’s Integrity and Constitutionalism be a welcome change? Wouldn’t he GO AFTER Wall St. CRIMINALS !?

    • Ray in VT

      Maybe not.  If he wants government to do next to nothing, then wouldn’t their actions probably not be crimes if he had his way?

    • Modavations

      Righteous!!!Take a bow

    • Dave

      But…… Rule of Law is so…….1800′s!

  • Mark

    So when are RP supporters going to acknowledge that cutting 70-80% of the Federal government will but ~1.4 to 1.6 million people of jobs?  His idea to cut government is lunacy!  Putting that many people out of work will plundge this country into a depression the likes that of which we have never seen, and quite frank may never recover from.  What studpidity!  

    • http://profiles.google.com/insidiom Christopher Dawson

      He’s stated that those people can work at McDonald’s.  Just like I tell my sister when she complains that she has no money and has little unemployment left.  Millions of people are making adjustments to their lives after being laid off.  

      • Anonymous

        Cute. Real cute. So your answer to your own blood is work for lousy wages or go live on the street.
        By the way if millions go to work for McDonald’s, which is not a solution to employment or decent growth, but it would not be possible. 

        • http://profiles.google.com/insidiom Christopher Dawson

          Jeffe – you should probably calm down or lay off the coffee.  Also, please remind yourself that it isn’t “my” answer, as I have zero experience in Economics.  I am not going to do anything, as I am not in any position to.  I also can’t speak to the inner workings of Ron Paul’s plans.  I can respond to your comment, though.

          There have been moments in history where people lost jobs and had to make ends meet however they could.  But they overcame.  The problem isn’t jobs.  It’s culture.  If our communities were more integrated, and people weren’t so damned self-centered, there would be a support structure for people who needed it.  If people just cared more about other people than iPads or American Idol, I think that the worry of joblessness would be measured.  Instead, the support structure for the unemployed is the American taxpayer.  In an integrated community, people could identify the moochers more easily and empower them to change their behavior.  To contribute.  That isn’t possible the way it is now.  Now, the Politicians and the Pundits tell us who the moochers are.  How are people supposed to be empowered to change their environment?

          There are few people my age who even know what it means to really work for a living, much less working at a job that pays less than ideal or even working two jobs.  Actually, for a lot of people that’s happening right now.  But the problem here is excess, greed, and corruption.  How do you stop it, Jeffe?  Wave a freaking magic wand of goodwill and honesty?

          What’s the definition of insanity again?  ‘Cause last I checked it was doing the same thing over and over while expecting a new result.  This recession should be a big red flag to everyone (not to mention that Ron Paul warned us about it years ago).  

          I understand you may disagree, but that’s what makes this kind of exchange so dad-gum precious.  

      • Mark

        Yep, all of the “job creators” will create ~1.4 million jobs on the day that RP fires all of those Federal employees.  Like that will ever happen. 

    • Joe72172

      okay Mark.  We are bankrupt now.  Lets dig the hole a little deeper.  Unemployment benefits for life.  

      • Mark

        So, let’s totally crash the economy and the country because you are scared to barrow some money.  Don’t be silly.  

        • Joe72172

          You obviously have no clue how screwed we already are.  I am in finance and I can tell you that after the Euro falls the US $ will be next.  We are insolvent and and our empire is falling apart.  This country will be much better off without all the expensive and inefficient layers of government.

          • Dave

            http://www.usdebtclock.org/

            These folks don’t believe in money.

            They think debt is a joke.

            The horror for the masses when the dollar crashes, or some unaccountable international banking cabal supported by status quo politicians imposing austerity, will be a cruel reality check.

    • Ivanhoe

      Bastiat wrote about all of this 150 some odd years ago and we haven’t learned a thing since. If these Federal employees provide a vital function, that’s one thing. But if they aren’t needed, then there is no economic advantage by taking from one group of people to support another.

  • Heaviest Cat

    so is this pep rally for Ron Paul void of any critics WBUR’s idea of “independent” ,”objective” journalism?Yes, his candidacy is certainly newsworthy and warrants an hour on “On Point” but such lopsided boosterism is not what ‘BUR touts ,especially during fundraisers and flies in the face of public radio’s mission.

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

      Listen right now.

  • Amy

    More people are interested in Ron Paul than anyone else who has been talked about on here for a long time and it shows up in the comments section.  There are many more comments about this show than any others, you should do it again, but invite him to talk next time.

    • Joe72172

      Agree.  A show not during the fund raising week!!

    • Anonymous

      Not true, the 9/11 truth show had over 1400.
      Newt has over 200. But the day is young.

  • TFRX

    Are we going to hear, again, about the right-wing wet dream debate hypothetical? The “healthy 30-y.o. with a good job and no insurance who has a stroke” we’ve been beat over the head with since whichever Republican pep-rally it was introduced at?

    Show of hands:

    How many folks here have a “great job” which doesn’t have health insurance?

    How many folks here have stayed at a crap job only because it provided health insurance, or because the next job wouldn’t get them any owing to them having been ill at any point in their lives?

  • John

    I’d like to make an observation on the ROTC cadet’s comment that 1) cutting a trillion dollars from government spending would hurt very much, and 2) that money is better left in private hands. We find ourselves in the situation where companies are sitting on unspent trillions of dollars. How much is that helping, right now?

    • Anonymous

      Also Mr. ROTC would be out of funds for his training.
      The whole idea is nuts in my view. It’s draconian to make such huge cuts. I want better run government not little or none. I want a government that is efficient and is held accountable for it’s actions. I also want wall street and the banks to be put under more control of regulations and oversight as it is clear that they can’t police themselves.
       

      • John

        The “invisible hand” of the market is most adept at finding its way into the pockets of the working class. We’re like a herd of cattle whose primary purpose is to meet the hunger of those who manipulate the economy. RP’s contention that our present woes can be traced to the institution of the Fed and of the income tax ignores all that we have achieved in the last century, admittedly not all above reproach but staggering in its accomplishments. Some of the noise coming out of the political Right is all about protecting America’s future. To paraphrase Mitt, they seem to forget that “America is people too”

    • Jack

      There is a system of 1) corporatism in America and 2) spending isn’t always beneficial.  In fact, Americans need to learn how to save their money.

      • Dave

        The folks on this blog can’t tell the difference between Corporatism and Free Markets bound by Rule of Law.

        They also think money grows on trees.

        And finally, they are largely apathetic about our march toward China-style, technocratic authoritarian capitalism, as opposed to bottom up free markets.

        https://www.montpelerin.org/montpelerin/documents/Toby%20Evans.pdf

        …on Authoritarian Capitalism

  • Elliot

    Libertarians believe in having government, that it is important.  They differ on its uses by saying that the purpose of government is to insure our individual freedom and liberty (from one another’s actions).  This is a much better idea than constantly paying people to do exactly the wrong things as our government tends to do today.

  • Dave

    Tom,

    Can you please explore how Ron Paul and his Austrian-influenced economic views predicted and warned about the impending financial fiasco well ahead of time?

    Those are the lessons/views that people like in the wake of the Banking debacle.

    List of those calling crash:
    http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=32412

  • snathan

    Max Boot of all people calling some one “not serious” is the reason “pot calling kettle black” phrase was invented.

  • Specs AreGood

    This CFR guy needs to go, he represents the problem in D.C. the warmongers are in charge.    People, you not happy with the state of the US?  This Max Boot guy is part of the people to blame.

  • Anonymous

    Is Lyndon LaRouche running again?  Why do the media ignore him?

  • Chuck_D

    It isn’t about Ron Paul, it is about what he is saying, his philosophy, and that he has been constantly constantly correct for so long.  Gingrich, Romney and these other clowns will not win against Obama because they are just like him.

  • JMC

    propping up dictators has been an effective foreign policy?

    • Ray in VT

      It’s been a disgrace, but we’ve often done it to support what we perceived to be our economic interests.

      • JMC

        it is self perpetuation of extending the only job stimulus that the necons can provide, WAR

        • Dave

          …which can’t be done without the Fed debt machine.

          The Fed provides the strings for the puppeteers.

  • Dave

    Walk softly and carry a big stick.

    Let’s not let this conservative status quo guest hijack the narrative.

    Why I am Not a Conservative, A.F. Hayek
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/hayek1.html

  • Donna

    Where is the compassion?  I agree that people should have the right to put anything they want in their bodies without government interference.  But what about the crack babies that result?  How about the serious car accident victims that result? Who pays for their care?  Charity organizations have failed miserably, that’s why we have government programs.

  • CatH.

    Many people like what Ron Paul says but fears he doesn’t have a good chance. A lot of RP supporters are not republicans. Many states that tells you if you can vote in the republican primaries even if you are not a registered republican.

  • Scott B, Jamestown NY

    A Libertarian highway is a field. A libertarian school is a field. A libertarian army doesn’t exist.

    I agree that we don’t need our troops in Europe, but China’s rattling its sabre elsewhere in the world, mainly Asia and Africa.  On occasion we do have to be the world’s policeman. Stopping  genocide in Kosovo, for example.  No one else was going to stop it.

    Libertarianism is near anarchy, and does become a plutocracy. He forgets why we have social safety nets, that well over half the seniors and children lived in poverty and spent their days cold and hungry.

    The Fed does need auditing, and to explain itself often, but other countries have tried to end there Fed-like departments (some, like UK, several times) and they quickly go back as their money situation starts going amok.

    No Commerce Dept.?  Welcome back to the dumping for foreign steel and goods.  NPR just had the story of how China’s trying to run and end-around to dump honey in the US. 

    No EPA?  The single-most reason for the decrease in prison population is the elimination of lead in the paint children come into contact with.  When’s the last time a river caught on fire?  Love Canal is an hour’s drive from here. Does anyone care to see that in their back yard?  Let the Koch bros. get their wish.

    • Dave

      We’ll take your word for it.

      • Scott B, Jamestown NY

        Don’t just take my word for it, look it up.

    • Joe72172

      Most military bases in this country are super fund sites.  Most big corporations don’t clean up their mess.  Ron Paul would hold polluters accountable.  The EPA is a joke.  I know this first hand.  On the surface it is a good idea but just like everything else is is a failure

      • TFRX

        Ron Paul would hold polluters accountable.

        How? The only way I see it is by the force of law as applied by government.

        • Dave

          Classic TFRX.  How about laws and law enforcement. Suing in the courts.

          Who told you libertarians don’t want law? Courts?

          Why did you believe them?

          • Ray in VT

            But when it comes down to wealthy corporations, which can spend millions to litigate an issue to death, versus Joe Schmo wronged-citizen, who do you think is often going to win?  That’s just reality.

          • Dave

            “The great aim of the struggle for liberty has been equality before the law.”
            —F.A. Hayek[1]
            Giving up?

          • TFRX

            You probably trust all those GOP-appointed justices with your future, don’t you.

            Another Libertarian theory that falls apart in practice.

          • Dave

            I’d trust Paul’s appointees.

            And there is no group I would trust less than Frank, Paulson, Greenspan, Geithner, Rubin, Summers…. et al.

            You technocratic ecomomic wizards who handed us to Wall St. Bankers on a silver platter.

          • Scott B, Jamestown NY

            If it’s not wanting laws, then it’s passing the buck down to the lowest level, where those there haven’t the means  and wherewithal to enforce law. 

          • TFRX

            Classic Libertarian: Individuals hope that some judge rules that they have standing to, say, sue BP over the Gulf spill.

            All those working-class people in Cancer Alley, TX, get to pool their resources and sue the corporations spilling all that shite in their water and air.

            You couldn’t be a better caricature of a Libertarian if you tried.

        • Lupis42

          If property rights are enforced, instead of requiring all pollution related decisions to be funneled through one slow bureaucratic agency, it becomes possible for people to take matters into their own hands, and simply sue polluters.  The force of law, but applied by citizens in proportion to the problem, rather than wielded by bureaucrats.

          • TFRX

            “If property rights are enforced”.

            Do you want to go through all those right-wing judges against a corporation? Good luck with that crap. Look up the Roberts Court Strike Zone.

        • Modavations

          You’re starting to sweat son

          • TFRX

            I’d like to know what app you’re using that lets you monitor my vitals. Last I knew the internet didn’t do that.

            Or is that the projection of someone whose meds need rebalancing?

      • Scott B, Jamestown NY

        He can’t if he strips the government down to the bare bones and does away with the EPA. 

        Paul’s ideas are based that business will do the right things because it’s based in their best interests.  That, however, has never proven true, and is, in fact, the opposite.  Those polluters did so because it benefited their bottom line to dump harmful waste and materials as cheaply as possible. 

        The people that do this are never effected as they aren’t doing this in their back year, they’re far removed.  Let’s see them eat fish from those rivers, and eat the produce from those grounds, and not sit at home, far away, drinking bottled water and eatting organic food.

    • Dave

      in a more Libertarian world, property rights become more important.  It would be easier to sue for pollution (trespass) if we were more libertarian and market-based. Also Keynes helped to produce the sprawl that caused most of our wars, increased the population beyond what the market would have otherwise allowed, and produced the sprawl that helped to wreck our environment.  The EPA wastes more of our environment than it helps.  It takes 6 months to get through all the paperwork at the EPA just to put in a new sidewalk in town.  Think of all the gas, food, and electricity the EPA workers are using during those 6 months while someone is waiting to replace their sidewalk.  EPA?

      Our social nets only insure we are all forces by gunpoint to pay people for their poor decisions, that is the purpose of charity and churches, not our government.  The people who receive this should get it with the understanding that someone has been charitable with them, not that they have a right to someone’s money and work as happens today.

      • Scott B, Jamestown NY

        You mean what’s happening now with the rich lobbying trying to keep ever more of their wealth? “What’s mine is mine”.  And from what everyone can see the true “Golden Rule” is, “He who has the gold makes the rules.” 

        Charity is great , but one of the reasons we have these social safety nets and government agencies is because it was not enough.

        You’re really worried how much food EPA workers are eating and the fuel that takes?  I would think that’s a minute fraction of what it’s costing this country to pay private contractors to do the same job they did in their government job that was cut in under the banner of reducing the size of government and waste.

        In this time of Christmas all I seem to be hearing from you, and so many like you is: “Are their no prisons? Are there no work houses?”  – Scrooge

        • Dave

          There is no Santa Claus. The Federal Reserve is the closest we’ve gotten.

  • Jalbert

    Does Ron Paul believe that “the market”, rather than government, should regulate human trafficking? If he doesn’t, then he his hopelessly– not to mention morally– out of touch with modern civilized society. If he does think government should regulate human trafficking and other repugnant commercial activity, then we can conclude that government does have an important regulatory role in commerce, and he, just like everyone else, wants to regulate some things and not others. That’s where the conversation be.

    • Joe72172

      The police should monitor this and many other things.  We have laws now….what’s your point?  What part of the government is stopping human trafficking now.  You make it sound like RP would turn a blind eye. 

      • Dave

        That’s their favorite red herring tactic, or ignorance.

        People are so status quo-ified they mindlessly accept the false logic that if a Big Central government manage everything, it means we don’t address, or care about those issues. 

        Big Brother or nothing is the sad assumption.

  • Dave

    All the skeptics and cynics here need to look at the whole Fed Banking/Unsound money, Big Government, Military Industrial Complex picture. It’s a holistic understanding, and that is why it describes so well our financial problems and our perpetual war problems.

    Take a breath, take some time and look into the issues for a while.

  • Julia Cohen

    Our military (people who actually know what they are talking about) give more to Ron Paul more than any other candidates and they base their donations on Paul’s statements about how best to defend this country.  We create enemies Max, we are in every country in the world, but we are bankrupt.  We are like Rome, and people like Max would have been there to help Rome fall.

  • Dsheldon

    What happens to those Americans that , through no fault of their own, were not born with the intelligence to adequately invest their tax savings for retirement and other basic needs.
    We are not all created equal and what a sad future to see our less fortunate in the intellect dept kicked to the curb. Not everyone can be a doctor or other professional with the high income and the talent or means to hire a professional to invest their money for a better life for themselves. Don’t forget these people!

    • Dave

      That’s right, YOU, the individual, the family, the community, don’t forget these people.

      • Ray in VT

        But we all need to.  When part of the community suffers and wants then we are all affected.  There are things that the community can do in order to alleviate these problems.  They’ll never be solved, and government/community action is only a part of the solution, but the notion that individual action, or no action at all, will somehow magically solve all of the problems that we have is just plain nuts.

        • Dave

          What’s nuts is thinking Washington DC, its bureaucrats and banking cronies are going to do the right thing.

          Your’e good intentions and lack of faith in the people of your community provide cover for the swindlers and debt-spenders in DC who don’t care one whit whether they spend us into oblivion as long as they are re-elected, and well-conneceted.

          • Ray in VT

            Probably like most people I like my own representatives and think that it’s the other jokers that are the problem.  If it comes down to having faith in something, I’ll take faith in citizens working together to solve our nation’s problems over just letting it fly and seeing where it goes.

          • Dave

            There is a alot of space between taking a Federal Solution to every problem, corruptible Central Planning approach, and “just letting it fly”.

            I hope people take the time to exploring the concepts and see there is a better way.

            “The great aim of the struggle for liberty has been equality before the law.”
            —F.A. Hayek[1]

        • Christopher Peters

          But, community need not mean, and probably should not mean, the Federal government. A given community, county or state could enact any policy it feels is prudent towards these ends of “social justice”. Keeping such efforts local, at no greater scale than the state level, would better help the people being served, would make the system more accountable and flexible, and remove a large proportion of the special interest effects in D.C.

  • Dave

    Tom,

    Please address Ralph Nader’s support for Ron Paul.

    It goes to this point of Tea Party/Occupy common ground.

    “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” 

    -Nader

  • Dana

    I don’t understand why all this excitement about any of the presidential candidates? As we can see it is not the President that has power but the Congress. We should be choosing, voting for a change in the structure of the government. Get rid of the House of Reps, cut Senate in half, get rid of the filibuster and introduce the simple majority rule and maybe then something will be done. I know, I know that it requires changes in the constitution and of course with this structure of government no such amendment could ever be voted for and this really shows the type of  Paragraph 22 status quo. What about national referendum for such changes? Too radical idea?

  • JMC

    next conflict that we decide to engage lets have the top 1% be required to fight on the front lines and see if they are still enthusiastic of such a foreign policy.

  • Anonymous

    Why is this show only talking about Ron Paul’s foreign policy and not the other 90% of what he stands for?

    • JMC

      becuase that is the only thing that career politicians can scare people into not voting for him.

  • Steve

    Despite having largely been left out of the national political conversation these last two elections because of his refusal to fall into one of the two political parties, Americans continue to come to his support. I have questions about a number of his policies, but I admire him more than any other candidate (including Barack Obama, for whom I voted) because of his unrelenting consistency for over 40 years. It’s refreshing, and I’m of the opinion that a shakeup is needed in our political system to wake us up to its impotence and bring citizens back to the national conversation.

    • Aircond_gypsy_63

      @ Steve; I could not agree any more. I am sick of being sold a bill of goods during election campaigns by the politicians. heck they can’t even have un-structured open debate on the issues because they DON’T even know the issues well enough to debate the merits of them, let alone the solutions to the problems which exist! Ron Paul can and will,at length, explain (in common speech we can all understand) the issues in depth and the most favorable solutions to these problems. And his stance on this does not sway in the corporate wind as do all the others.

  • snathan

    I would argue one of reasons for appeal for a candidate like Ron Paul is the failure and non-accountability of the ruling elites in the corporate, govt, military, media sectors of the country.

    • Dave

      “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” 
      Ralph Nader

      http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/28/ralph-nader-hearts-ron-paul-ha

  • Joe72172

    Max wants to continue to police the world.  Glad he’s gone.

  • Bart

    When establishment Candidates and their supports talk about National “DEFENSE” they’re really talking about Un-Constitutional irrational OFFENSE !

    • Bart

      “supportERS”

  • Ellen Dibble

    Caller Juliet about 40 minutes into the show cited CIA studies that indicate our vulnerability globally is due to our policies, and therefore a strong defensive posture is no help, and is actually, she says, the part of the policy that is counterproductive, if I understood her correctly.  I’d like to see that CIA study.  My suspicion is that a great deal of American military presence worldwide is appreciated, and the United Nations is not up for doing that on our behalf, no matter who pays for it.  But Peace offensives, friendship policies, like the Peace Corps, I’m learning, were actually established like a guilt-payment, kind of in trade for supporting dictatorships far and wide during the Cold War.  Currently, I think the USA supports more democratic endeavors.  If she means that American support for Israel underlies all our difficulties with the Arab World, well, that’s another issue.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Eric-Heinen/163904030 Eric Heinen

      Hello Ellen, this is the CIA expert the caller was referring to.

      Extended Interview with Michael Scheuer

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQviZPyeXk

    • Rob

      Ellen, Ron Paul also frequently cites the 9/11 commission’s official report, which explains the concept of “blowback”. Blowback is the unintended consequence of creating resentment among foreign populations as a result of our military presence there. Check out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQrwKr_b4Lg

  • Charlestayler

    human trafficking is one person attempting to govern over another and our government exists to prevent that sort of thing.  Libertarians do not say we should not have government, just that it should be there to protect our freedom, not get into ever detail of our lives, and blow up everyone around the world.  There is also the fact that the banks should not control the value of all of your currency.

  • Dave

    Nice last minute smear!

  • TFRX

    So, we got two supporters, a reporter from the WaPo (Beltway central), and a non-Paulite right-winger. And our host gets to both host and provide any left-of-center pushback.

    Time for public radio’s favorite panel game: Spot the liberal!

    • Modavations

      If NPR is not 125% left,you are offended.Half the country is Laissez faire

      • TFRX

        Thanks for trying to play. You don’t even get some Turtle Wax as a parting gift.

  • Janet Da

    It is illegal to use silver as currency in the US, because the Fed knows that everyone will eventually drop the dollar if it is allowed.  Why will they not allow competition?  Why does our government physically attack and imprison people for using silver or gold in the US as a currency?

    • Aircond_gypsy_63

      competition in corporate structure is the prime sin, to be avoided at all cost,(murder included). the U.S. has been a corporation since the latter part of the 1800′s it stopped representing the people who make up majority of the populace then.

  • Susan for Ron Paul 2012

    When will the “War on Drugs end?”  When will the “War on Terrorism” end?  Wars are negative things which is why asking when and how the war will end has always been.  But these wars are scheduled never to end. 

  • miro

    Ron Paul is mostly an economic libertarian, which has allowed him to maintain a place in right wing political culture. His major contribution, were he to succeed, would be to reduce the military budget and re-define our military’s mission to be national defence (vs. trying to control large parts of the globe). He is for ending drug prohibitions and the drug war, but his libertarianism stops short of reproductive and sexual freedom (abortion, gay marriage).

    There has always been an egalitarian libertarian argument that the rich need government spending and regulation to amass and maintain their fortunes. Both Republicans and Democrats are captured by business interests such that the country is run to favor them. A libertarianism that disallowed inherited wealth and were oriented towards self-help aid for non-wealthy individuals could be an alternative to the two parties. But this is not Ron Paul or the current conservative libertarian tea party movement. The Ron Paul movement is tied to conservative, plutocratic Republican politics rather than egalitarian libertarianism. He would never be able to enact the positive parts of his political program (cut military spending, get the US out of the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, end the drug war).

    However one may agree or disagree with some of his specific policy positions, libertarian economic theory simply does not work. Unfettered free markets concentrate wealth and are prone to boom-bust cycles (for structural and psychological reasons). They result in societies where wealth disparities increase not decrease.

    Abolition of social security and medicare would result in widespread poverty and hunger among the old. Social insurance is coercive, yes, but in the end it is worth knowing that one will not be abandoned in one’s advanced age and left without basic  food, housing, and medical care.

    • Dave

      “However one may agree or disagree with some of his specific policy positions, libertarian economic theory simply does not work. Unfettered free markets concentrate wealth and are prone to boom-bust cycles (for structural and psychological reasons). They result in societies where wealth disparities increase not decrease.”

      Nonsense.  Why did all the Austrian-influence libertarian types call the crash well ahead of time?

      The Fed leverages and jumpstarts the “business cycle” bubbles, and causes over/mal-investment in unsustainable sectors that does nothing but create illusions of growth, suckers in the public to the markets, and enriches the Wall St cronies who provide the infrastructure for our fleecing.

  • MICHIGANJF

    Excellent Rebuttal of Max Boot’s neo-con hawkishness…

    I’d also make the point that, instead of securing American prosperity though threat, intimidation, and corruption, as we have in the past, we could have obtained an infinitely better result for America over the last 130 years if we had saved the money from military adventurism and simply paid market price for resources… just as the Chinese are doing now.

    We could have left the protection of trade routes and resources to those who have the stongest interest in defending their own trade and economies, and participated in wars only when we deemed involvement absolutely essential.

    In the meanwhile, the vast sums of money we would have saved might have allowed us to build a society far beyond anything we’ve built in the past, and beyond anything we’ve dreamed, all the while setting a genuinely worthy example to the world and genuinely holding the moral high ground.

    • Anonymous

      Excellent points.

      I’m was a big fan of Obama, until he kept us in Afghanistan after bin Laden….

      Now, Obama is only the less bad choice. 

      What’s the best?

      See my main comment.

  • Dave

    Paul videos, interviews:

    http://www.ronpaul2012.com/media/

  • Bruce

    Paul does seem to inspire his supporters like some kind of cult hero reminiscent of libertarian icon, Ayn Rand who also atttracted youthful worshippers. And as with Rand, I suspect this popularity among young people has less to do with them “becoming more educated” and more to do with their typically narcissistic dreams of omnipotence and immortality.  As we know many youngsters view themselves as invincible–why would they support social welfare or private/public partnerships to invest in health, education, infrastrucure, research, etc., all of which is necessary to creating a civil society and competing in the global economy.  Of course, a little life experience is usually enough to disabuse ourselves of our adolescent dreams of omnipotence.  And in the end, even Rand, the disciple of small government and unregulated markets took Social Security and Medicare.The hyprocisy of those who tell us “do as I say, not as I do” aside, Ron Paul’s policy prescriptions would usher us back to the unregulated, rapacious capitalism that was largely responsible for the economic collapse in 2008.
    Does anyone seriously believe or maintain with a straight face that the financial and housing markets were over-regulated in the period leading up to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and subsequent recession?  There is nothing new in the laissez-faire, states’ rights rhetoric of Ron Paul or any other fringe conservative.  The libertarian nirvana that such a view evokes is not too appealing to me; it woud turn the clock back to the Jim Crow 1950′s or the 1920′s with its extreme income inequality and conspicuous consumption or even worse to the Antebellum South.  These are not times and places the majority of even marginally educated people want to go. 

    • Dave

      The only thing that turns the clock back to 1950′s is people’s minds. If you want to live in the past, feel free, but the rest of us don’t have to.

      Hard to conspicuously consume without the Fed providing all the funny money, let alone the bubbles themselves.

      Do you call the Housing Bubble/Wall St. orgy fueled by unsound monetary policy, a free market problem? It’s the poster child of Centrally Managed, malinvestment and bubble pumping made possible by the Fed and collusion with the Wall St Banking class and revolving door Washington crowd.

      Bailouts and Too big to fail are free market?

      Thats a joke.

      • Ray in VT

        I’ll side with Bernie Sanders:  Too big to fail; too big to exist.  But what do we do with large institutions or industries that are in danger of collapsing and taking up down with them?  Let it happen?  I didn’t like the bailouts, but I liked the alternatives a lot less.  Also, government and the Fed didn’t create CDOs and the securitization of risky mortgages.  Firms did that because they could take a risk, make some fast bucks and then pass along the product to some other sucker before it crashed.  There’s your free enterprise.

        • Dave

          The alternatives are what keep people honest, and that keep people vigilant, instead of mere sheep consumers.

          Why don’t you step in front of traffic? Because you rightly don’t like the consequence.

          Removing the consequences from our actions is the path to destruction.

          Bankers and Politicians have kept us in the dark as they hollow out our society and take the spoils, holding themselves above the rule of law, and counting on our consumer distraction to keep us from playing the vigilant role that those who self-govern require.

          People appear to prefer consumptive bliss to the hard work of liberty and self-government.

          People should at least admit it.

    • Modavations

      Jim Crow was an invention of Southern Democrats.Lincoln freed the slaves.eisenhower liberated Little Rock.20% more Republicans voted for the Civil Rights legislation.The last Grand Dragon of the Klan was Robert Byrd.Jackie Robinson the baseball player,was a Republican.And I’m an Ayn Rand Groupie.Why does the Left deny the ghetto child School Vouchers.Because education means financial prosperity and financial prosperity means Republican voters

    • Modavations

      Dude,he paid into social Security and Medicare.

  • David Gann

    Considering President Obama’s dismal approval ratings one thing seems clear, who ever the Republican nominee is, he or she will have a better than average oppertunity to win the election. And hopefully bring real change, the change we have seen from the Obama administration have been the failed policies of the past (Jimmy Carter) on political steroids.

    • TFRX

      Don’t hold your breath waiting for our mainstream and propaganda press talk about Obama’s numbers with any accuracy or context.

      They only re-feed us a narrative when there are blips down. And otherwise it’s literally not a story when it’s not bad news for him.

      This goes back to the campaign when everything, everything was told to us by (say) Politico as “such good news for Republicans”. McCain gets caught lying to David Letterman about cancelling to get back to the Senate? “Such good news for McCain!” Them stopping their campaign in swing state Michigan? “Such good news for McCain!” Palin threatening to go rogue? “Such good news for McCain!”

      And if you remember the last decade, Shrub seemed to get better coverage for his poll numbers–by which I mean the press pretty much ignored those #s–when he was at 30%, thirty frking percent, than Obama while he is at historically normative numbers.

      • Modavations

        90% of journalists identify as Democrats.NBC and MSNBC are owned by GE’s Immelt and Obama owns Immelt.

        • TFRX

          The Moda-bot shows his ignorance about the “democracy” that is our mainstream press, once again.

  • El O

    Wow, look at all the comments on this subject, more please.  Bring on Ron Paul for an hour or two sometime soon.

  • Pingback: Amusing Comparison of the Day (Ron Paul Edition)

  • George the Fifth

    Of course, Max would give the boot to Ron Paul: Boot equates conservatism with unwavering support for Israel, and Paul is the only candidate who doesn’t see it that way.  While all of the other Republicans are falling over each other in their rush to show their unequivocal allegiance to Israel, Paul believes that Israel doesn’t need the U.S. to fight its battles, that Israel is potent enough to take care of itself.  So, here’s the reality-check: even if Paul were to emerge as front-runner, his candidacy would be effectively torpedoed by the ginormous Israel lobby.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1648938205 Tod Mills

      Ron Paul DOES support Israel:  He wants them to be strong and independent and able to make their OWN decisions about their future without interference from us.  He also wants to stop foreign aid to Israel’s enemies, not just Israel.  All of these things are ultimately in Israel’s best interest, much moreso than the policies espoused by the other candidates.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Eric-Heinen/163904030 Eric Heinen

    You should ask Max Boot if Ronald Reagan was acting “Reaganesque” when he pulled the Marines out Lebanon after suffering a suicide attack.

    • Bin

      Yes. Lebanon and the Middle East are 8,000 miles away from Kansas. There is no good reason to have American troops there. We are not the goddamn Roman Empire, we are America.

      • Modavations

        Drill baby drill and we can finally turn our backs on the MidEast tyrants

  • Dave

    So many red herrings around here. Time for a Liberty and Rule of Law, not Anarchy, primer.

    http://www.independent.org/students/essay/essay.asp?id=1612

    • nj

      Dave of the revolving handles bemoans “red herrings” while invoking “Anarchy,” as if anyone is talking about anarchy.

      Can’t invent this kind of irony.

      • Modavations

        I read” not anarchy”.

  • Needron

    For anybody who thinks Ron Paul extreme
    just remember that a president is not all powerful. He would not
    have he power to reverse Roe V Wade for example. There are few in
    either party who are willing to keep us from bankruptcy or to keep
    the NSA from recording EVERY conversation on the phone or on the
    Internet (Mark Klein) We have had 2 concurrent presidents of both
    parties virtually cancel the writs of Habeas Corpus while expanding
    the national deficit. to nearly unprecedented levels

    We need someone to pull us back from
    the precipice of government fiscal ineptitude coupled with corporate
    monopolies. We do not have the luxury of choosing where on the high
    side of the cliff we will end up.

    Ron Paul is man

  • Bin

    Many of Ron’s ideas are non-workable, but I admire his integrity and honesty. Maybe Obama should pick him up as a VP and take a page from his book on foreign policy and corporate welfare.

  • Bbj4050

    Bin, Freedom and liberty are unworkable?

  • Catnap

    Ron Paul received more campaign contributions from US military personnel than Obama and more contributions than all other Republicans combined:  http://youtu.be/FYxPkKGeVKI

    Bring home the troops…  Protect civil liberties…  Bring transparency to government… It seems like Ron Paul would actually do these things — that’s a large part of why he’s so popular.

    • Modavations

      Obama and the guys had a meeting about Transparency.It was held behind closed doors.

  • Royceterous

    The agencies created by government ultimately become ineffective due to bloating/increasing complexity.  Ron is justified in suggesting eliminating them and then rebuilding them as current situations suggest.  Sundowning ALL legislation might keep our laws/nation fresh.

    • Aircond_gypsy_63

      I fully agree to the Idea of sundowning. I think it solves a MAJOR problem with legislation and that is that it becomes out dated by changing times/circumstances and rather than review and repeal outmoded laws, new ones are piled up on top of them. This layering effect many times ends up being the “straw that broke the camels back” with small business owners being the camels.

  • Dave

    Monetary Breakdown of the West

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard240.html

    If not enough gold, throw in silver, platinum, something.

    Stop crying “unkle!” to the bankers, war mongers and debt peddlers, and demand sound money in one form or another.

  • Dave

    Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign PolicyBroaden your view and follow the money.http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard66.html

  • OnPointCensorship

    On Point removed a comment criticizing an earlier morning photo of RP they published along with today’s story.

    Around 2:30 am this morning, a comment was posted that read something like this:

    “Gee On Point, why don’t you choose a more flattering picture of Ron Paul.

    You know, like the 4 nice photos you posted of Gingrich in the past 3-weeks:  Nov. 18, Nov. 30, Dec. 2, Dec 9.

    In a period of 27 shows, On Point has had complimentary photos of Gingrich running 12.5% of the time.

    Now, that’s fair and balanced isn’t it?”

    The above comment has since been deleted and Ron Paul’s picture has been changed. 

    Not exactly a statesmanlike one, either.

    So, why did On Point censor and delete the comment above, but still changed the photo? 
     

    • Anonymous

      There are nice pictures of Gingrich? 

  • OnPointCensorship

    On Point has also removed and censored two posts critical of Jon Corzine’s role in MF Global’s collapse and On Point’s lack of making it a top story in last Friday’s ‘Week in the News’ show.

  • OnPointCensorship

    Why is On Point removing and banning commentators on this site who are engaging and being critical of the right-wing, trolling-pablum pervasive here while allowing the perpetrators free reign to harass and detour dialogue?

    • Modavations

      This is a matter of perpective.I find Tom A.to be extremely biased, to the left.I begrudge him nothing.I thrive on a difference of opinion.Free Speech gets messy.Perhaps one should look no further then your “trolling Pablum”.By the way,what is the fascination with that word.

  • Albert M

    Misinformation on “Social Security” gone. In fact, his Restore American Plan brings the troops home, saves $500 billion to be applied to Social Security and Medicare to safeguard these programs. Thanks for the coverage, but don’t misinform listeners from the get go. Ron Paul has deep and diverse support all across the country, this despite the media’s best efforts to malign him.

  • Albert M

    Since 2007, we have had all the media darlings: Giuliani, Thompson,
    Huckabee, Trancedo, Pawlenty, Cain (even McCain, won the nomination but
    proved to have been unelectable, even with his barbie doll VP),
    Hunstman, Santorum, Bachmann, Perry (makes George Bush look like a
    genius) and soon Romney and Gingrich will join the collectibles. The
    only survivor, the only one who has made relentless progress, despite
    the media’s best efforts to discourage voters from considering him is
    Ron Paul. I’d argue that only such a true survivor is electable and
    worthy of the nomination.

    Besides, his support is broad,
    diverse and deep. Whether in New York City, Louisiana, Nevada, Utah,
    California, Minnesota, Iowa, etc., Ron Paul attracts huge crowds, unlike
    the other religious panderers with their Sunday morning congregation
    support base. Democrats have formed the Blue Republican movement to
    encourage voters to register as Republicans in closed primary states.
    Yesterday, in Iowa, a Ron Paul campaign office was opened in a heavily
    dominated Democrat county. the campaign leader is former Democrat who
    campaigned for Obama.

    This broad-based support comes not from pandering, flip-flopping, or
    tailoring his message to suit his audience, the normal ploys used to con
    voters across partly lines. Ron Paul’s support comes from his
    consistency, which is based on his strict adherence to the Constitution.
    The Constitution unites us. Hence, Ron Paul is not only most likely to
    win the nomination, but the White House as well.

    • TFRX

      Doesn’t that list of GOP losers say more about Fox News’ ability to make our “mainstream” press pant on the window over the “GOP leader of the week” than about Ron Paul?

  • Albert M

    People don’t understand that when Ron Paul dismantles a government department at the Federal level, it saves money, helps cut taxes, but then at State level there is plenty of scope for legislators to take up the slack. He wants to bring government down to local level. That is his stance when it comes to cutting Federal programs, out-of-control bureaucracies.

    Government spending does not create jobs or prosperity. Every penny it spends comes from the taxpayer (now or later to pay the debt from today’s borrowing). If government spending creates wealth why don’t we give the government 90% of our income and capital. The Soviets tried this and failed  spectacularly. Switzerland, Singapore and Hong Kong are good examples of how people prosper when government spending is curtailed.

    • Anonymous

      Singapore has a progressive income tax that is in the 20% range. It also has very tight controls over it’s population with government regulations.
      Switzerland has an income tax of about 35% and both have a form of national health care subsidized by… big government.

      Hong Kong is part of China.

      • Albert M

        Government spending in Singapore is equal to 12.5% of GDP. It runs a budget surplus. I’m not concerned with its social policy, drug laws etc., just the miniscule size of its government. US companies that relocate manufacturing to Singapore pay no taxes.

        Switzerland ranks above the US in the Economic Freedom index. Per capita income $75,000. Switzerland spend 0.08% on defense. It, like Canada, which only spends $22 billion a year on defense, can afford to provide universal health care. We borrow and pay to police the world. Not much left after all that spending and borrowing.

        Hong Kong was independent for 99 years, very prosperous, debt free and with a very small government. Now part of China, but fiscal conservatism remains in place.

        • Anonymous

          Ahh yes, comparing the US to a nation that is the about the size of Connecticut is hardly a good example to compare defense budgets with. Besides culturally Switzerland might be prosperous place but what has it given the world, the Coo-coo clock and tax shelters. 

          You bring up Canada which has weathered the economic downturn better than we have. Why? Strong government banking regulations that prevented a housing bubble and banks making risky investments.
          Not to mention they have a NH system.
          I would be glad to give up loads of our military expenditure for a single payer health care system.     

          • Albert M

            Yes, healthcare over warfare. Vote Ron Paul and get rid of the warfare.

          • Modavations

            Before the Republicans took power in Canada their dollar was worth .65cents

        • Modavations

          Dude,I’d help you out,but youre on fire.I’m in Hong Kong once a year and even the bums are well coiffed.Look at our American Ghettos.Every one is run by a Democrat.What’s more dangerous,Baghdad,or Trenton?

      • Modavations

        You’re starting to sweat kid

      • Anonymous

        You are talking about countries with very small populations not made up of patchwork quilt of different ideas.  

        Also, you’ll go to jail in Singapore if you spit on the sidewalk.

      • april showers

        You miss his point, Government at the LOCAL level can be much more efficient and cost effective.  All those countries are significantly smaller, therefore the people have control over their government and   spending is concentrated on services the people want.

        This is why the US has states.  So the citizens can choose the services they want and/or need from a local government that they control, rather than a far away centralized top down authority which never works and is easily corrupted because of its absolute power.

      • RHN

        This is very misleading. While Switzerland has a progressive income tax, it typically falls under the 25% mark — well below that of the U.S. Furthermore, there are many tax breaks and NO taxation on capital gains from private property. Foreign, non-working residents of Switzerland can also negotiate their tax rates on an individual basis: it’s possible to be a Swiss resident and pay 0% income tax.

  • Albert M

    Ron Paul is not a conservative or a libertarian, he is a Constitutionalist. If you have a problem with Ron Paul, you have a problem with the Constitution.

    Max is a lackey of the military-industrial complex. Hi, Max, how are you paying for our wars and military expansions? Get real. You have mortgaged the future of our children and grand children. It’s immoral.

    If we are keeping the peace in Europe and Asia why don’t we get them to pay us a protection fee? Max lives in the 1930s. Our prosperity has evaporated. I can give Max 15 trillion reasons why he is dead wrong and Ron Paul is dead right.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C2STBLZJK4VKQBV27DVQX3I6CU FAX68

      We called that in the Philippines Rent not protection fee.
      Rented the massive Clark Air Field and Subic Bay.

      • Albert M

        We spend 5% of GDP on defense. Many of the countries we protect only spend 1%. Canada’s defense spending is $22 billion a year. That’s what we spend every ten days in Afghanistan. We need 3% of the Philippines GDP as protection money. We’ll pay the puny rentals out of the 3%.

        Iran also wanted to get rid of Saddam. The new government in Iraq is now an ally of Iran. China, a staunch ally of Iran (don’t bomb Iran; don’t even think of it) also wanted to get rid of Saddam. CNOOC (China’s state-owned oil company) is now in partnership with Iraq’s state oil company. (CNOOC’s 20F filed with the SEC).

        We fight the wars, do the protection, play the policeman (all unconstitutional) and others walk off with the spoil. For Max’s benefit: China lends us the money to fight these wars. Our taxes go towards paying the interest on the debt. Heaven help us when interest rates double on us.

        • Modavations

          457 billion this year alone.

          • nj

            Still striving—and again failing—for his broken-clock moment of the day, Unmotivating offers an apparently random figure of $457b for 2011 spending. Not even close. Try $904b. (http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_chart_30.html)

            And this is actually closer to 6% of GDP than the 5% mentioned by Albert.

          • Modavations

            That 457 billion iis the interest on the debt for this year alone.I appologize,but it was merely an oversight.The Defense budget is about 650 billion ish

          • nj

            Hoping to be taken seriously, even when presented with data drawn from official, government sources, Modatroll insists—giving no attribution—on other figures pulled from his butt.

          • Modavations

            Def.Budget is 650Bill.,not 952 bill

    • dreconomist

      Well, you know all the old timers like Max don’t want to give up their cush pensions and benefits to golf in paradise locations around the globe on our dime.

    • Bbb

      It’s not the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the constitution that Ron Paul believes in, but his own. I guess that makes him a constitutionalist.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

        Can you cite examples where his interpretation conflict with that of the Supreme Court? If here are, I am very pleased that he and the Court have the same interpretations on my free speech, my right to due process (no assassinations), my right a speedy trial, my right of protection against warrantless searches (no Patriot Act)… If you want more wars, more torture, more assassinations, more drone attacks on innocent Muslims, more debt, more spending… Ron Paul is not your candidate.

        • Bbb

          The label “tyranny” as applied by Ron Paul supporters is a meaningless catch-all phrase that is stamped on whatever doesn’t line up with their ideology.

          If Ron Paul had his way, the already weak government institutions that are insufficiently holding back the tide of ever-encroaching corporate tyranny (wow, that was easy) would be finally killed off.

          It’s unsettling each time seeing someone take a political position based off of fear. I wonder how you feel your freedom of speech is being infringed. Maybe if you had more money, your speech would be elevated to a more visible position than the bottom of the comments section on an npr program. Who supported Citizen’s United again?

  • Anonymous

    You mean like Obama.

  • Anonymous

    You mean like Obama

  • James T. E.

    Instead of talking about theory, which always works, my questions involve real problems.  The business community fails to employ tens of millions of people.  How are the ones that family and charty can’t afford going to survive?  How will they be able to improve their situation via education or training if they have no income to pay?  What happens in those states who vote no to help?

  • ElfmanNW

    The other Republicans are in bed with big monied interests and committed to a big military and interventionist foreign policy.  I strongly support the idea of Ron Paul mounting a third party run for President in 2012.  Run Ron Run!

  • Anonymous

    Looking forward to vote Ron Paul in 2012!

  • EmbarrassedMaybe

    Here’s more proof of On Point’s censorship continuing…

    The comment below was recently removed for a second time and two others comments relating to the continued censorship by On Point’s comment page.

    This is what was removed a short while ago:

    On Point removed a comment criticizing an earlier morning photo of Ron Pual they published along with today’s story.

    Around 2:30 am this morning, a comment was posted that read something like this:

    “Gee On Point, why don’t you choose a more flattering picture of Ron Paul.

    You know, like the 4 nice photos you posted of Gingrich in the past 3-weeks:  Nov. 18, Nov. 30, Dec. 2, Dec 9.

    In a period of 27 shows, On Point had complimentary photos of Gingrich running 12.5% of the time.

    Now, that’s fair and balanced isn’t it?”

    The above comment has since been deleted and Ron Paul’s picture has been changed.  Not exactly statesmanlike one might think.

    So, why did On Point delete the comment above, but changed the photo? 

    Embarrassed maybe?

  • Joe72172

    Charity worked when citizens were taxed at 10% or less.  Everyone is over taxed and broke.  Health care in this country too expensive.  Big pharma controls the industry and will not stop until we are all on medication from cradle to grave.  I went to the hospital last year with a terrible migraine.  I was in the emergency room for 4 hours and left with a $5000 bill and told I would be fine.  If these prices weren’t so out of whack, charities could fund health care for the under privileged.  Personally, I donate to local shelters and food banks.  If I weren’t taxed seven ways to Sunday I would give a lot more.  I am not a wealthy person and if I miss a month of work I will lose my house.  Still I give every month. 

    • Modavations

      A few years ago,John Kerry gave $400.00 to charity

  • Joe72172

    Charity worked when citizens were taxed at 10% or less.  Everyone is over taxed and broke.  Health care in this country too expensive.  Big pharma controls the industry and will not stop until we are all on medication from cradle to grave.  I went to the hospital last year with a terrible migraine.  I was in the emergency room for 4 hours and left with a $5000 bill and told I would be fine.  If these prices weren’t so out of whack, charities could fund health care for the under privileged.  Personally, I donate to local shelters and food banks.  If I weren’t taxed seven ways to Sunday I would give a lot more.  I am not a wealthy person and if I miss a month of work I will lose my house.  Still I give every month. 

    • Joe72172

      this was in response to Donna half way down the page.  She was asking who will take care of the poor.
      For some reason it didn’t post where I wanted it to.

      • Albert M

        Relatively speaking, there won’t be any poor! Govt. overreach causes poverty. Ask the Soviets. Cuba’s government spending comprises 80% of GDP.

        Americans, by nature is very generous, almost to a fault. Give us the right to retain all or 90% of our wages and we will take care of the poor. It is in our nature.

        When government takes over social functions, citizens tend to withdraw all or some of their support. Government aid dehumanizes. Personal aid forms deep friendships, relationships and bonding.

        • Modavations

          The business of the Dem.Party is keeping poor people poor.The party of the Social Worker has made a racket out of poverty

    • James T. E.

      I think it’s great that you give even in hard times–one missed paycheck away.
      Who told you that “charity worked” sometime in the past? Beware of that Reaganesque false nostalgia for a past that never existed.  Suggested: “The Worst Hard Time” http://www.amazon.com/Worst-Hard-Time-Survived-American/dp/B001TODNZ0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323805428&sr=8-1

      I will say that Dr. Paul is the only candidate I’ve seen in these debates who comes off like a serious person and not some kind of beyond parody cartoon.  I would love to be able to talk discuss issues with him.

    • ElfmanNW

      The six Wal-Mart heirs who have as much
      wealth as the bottom 305 of Americans are broke?  The 400
      wealthiest Americans that have as much wealth as the bottom half of
      all Americans are broke?  Maybe when you were presented that
      $5,000 medical bill you should have offered to pay the emergency room
      with a a nice family bucket from KFC instead?  I needed a
      colonoscopy last year and the clinic wanted $600 for it. I
      that they would have taken a fish fry dinner for six instead. That’s
      as practical as expecting voluntary donations to make up for what
      programs like Medicaid, Medicare, and SS do now to alleviate
      poverty.  Want to know what your low tax reliance on charity
      would be like.  Read up on the history of late 19th Century
      England.  Charity never worked, it just left millions in abject
      poverty. I am curious how you can consider yourself over
      taxed “seven ways to Sunday” and yet don’t consider
      yourself wealthy and would lose your home if you missed a month of
      work.  I mean I am guessing that you must be making much more
      than the median US income of about $45,000 a year to be paying all
      that much in taxes, yet still would lose your home from missing one
      months of income? 

      • Albert M

        A lot of what you say is correct, but don’t blame Ron Paul for it. Blame your government who has spent every dollar it collected and another $9 trillion in borrowed money on top of that the past ten years, with one dissenting vote, that of Ron Paul. If government spending is the solution, we should all be swimmingly rich today.

        Mr Walton started a retail store in Arkansas. He and his family built it into the largest retailer in the world. Poor people, like myself (and many wealthy ones too), can go and shop there and get decent quality and a wide selection of product at affordable prices.

        Wal-Mart went public. Private pension funds invested in the company to the benefit of many retirees today and for years to come. Wal-Mart has increased its dividend by 19% p.a. the past ten years.

        If only your Social Security funds were invested in Wal-Mart instead of being blown of nation building wars. The govt. has failed you and will continue to fail you. Wal-Mart is not without fault, but it employs hundreds of thousands of employees, pays tens of billions of dollars in taxes every year and generously rewards investors with ever-increasing dividends. Sounds easy, but it is very difficult to pull offf. If the original owners are wealthy as a result, they earned it. 

        Our national debt would have been much higher but for successful businesses like Wal-mart. Our national debt would have been much lower, but we lack men and women of integrity in Washington, men like Ron Paul.

  • WeAreThe999Percent

    Libertarianism is pure fantasy, much like communism. I only hope we don’t have to elect a President Paul to find out how bad things will get if we take a chainsaw to virtually every federal program.

    • Joe72172

      I am sorry but you have no clue.  Federal spending is responsible for the demise of this great country.  We have been spending money we dont have for far too long and we will pay the price soon.  You think your 401 took a beating in 2008?  Wait till 2012 when things come crashing down.  Good luck.  I think a chain saw to federal spending is the first step.

      • WeAreThe999Percent

        Glad to see you all engaging on this issue. I’ll be the first to agree that government doesn’t do everything well. That’s why we need some blend of a free market and government intervention to correct market failures. Unfortunately, libertarians all too often worship the market and don’t recognize the MANY negative externalities it creates–hello greenhouse gases, overfishing, food poisoning, the financial meltdown. Just like communists, who have total faith in government, libertarians in love with Adam Smith, or worse, Ayn Rand, are just too closed-minded to hear any talk of a balanced approach.

        • Kevin

          Libertarianism created the financial meltdown?  Really?  Ever heard of the housing bubble, which was caused by a combination of the Fed, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac, with a dash of the CRA?

          Read Thomas E. Woods, Jr.’s _Meltdown_ for an honest appraisal of the causes of the current economic bust from the point of view of the ONLY school that predicted it:  the Austrians Ron Paul follows.

          • Anonymous

            Not quite the truth. But then again after reading some of your comments I’m not sure that facts are what interest you.
            Fannie and Freddie were knee deep in the poo as they say at least 84% of the sub-prime loan garbage came from the private sector.

            It’s easy to blame government for all our ills, but I’m inclined to think there is enough blame to go around to every major hedge fund, bank and investment firm in this country and Europe.

          • Albert M

            Fannie and Freddie were the creation of government to give the housing market a “helping hand.” It artificially boosted the property market, housing prices and allowed people who could not afford homes to buy them.

            There are no such agencies in Canada. Home ownership is higher in Canada and they did not experience a housing bubble.

            As Reagan taught us: “The most terrifying words in the English language is, I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.”

          • Modavations

            I’ll trade you 20 Obamas for one Harper or Martin

          • Steve

            I will see your Harper and raise you a Jefferson and a Jackson.

          • Modavations

            Frankie Raines,Morse and Jamie Gorelik took over 100million in commisions from Fannie.For every bogus mortgage they wrote, they got a commission.Barney Frank, when asked if he forsaw in problem with giving people without wherewithal,mortgages said,we’ll worry about that later ,if there are problems!!!I thought you were going fishing,today

        • Albert M

          Ah, well, we are much closer than I thought. You have too much respect for government regulators and too little for the law of property. Government regulations are not written by the likes of you. The executives who pay the likes of Gingrich to do their lobbying indirectly write the regulations. In the end, they have absolved themselves of any legal liabilities. The regulations act as a shield of protection.

          Why have so few (if any) Wall Street bankers gone to jail? Because the SEC regulated Wall Street and everything was done in accordance with the regulator’s book. It jury-proofed them. The modus operandi is to extract a fine, but no acknowledgment of wrong doing. If a drug kills you, but it was FDA approved, your family has little to no recourse. Regulations protect the ones who are being regulated form pesky property law lawsuits – for the most part.

          In addition, the regulators are using the agencies as a stepping stone into the corporations (or their law firms) that they are supposed to regulate. Got to keep your nose clean, not rock the boat and in the end, jump the fence, land that cushy job at the corporation/law firm. Regulators are also often far less informed and up to speed with the industries they regulate. It’s a scam. Like most things related to government  it is not all its is cracked up to be.

          Ron Paul will bring the troops home. For the rest he will need the help of Congress. The military give him more donations than the other candidates combined. For the sake of the troops, vote Ron Paul and bring them home.

          • Albert M

            Also, MF Global was very well “regulated.” CEO Corzine (frormer senator and governor, $7 million exec. comp package in first year – can’t make this stuff up), says $1.2 billion is missing and he can’t find the money. Regulations that protect the investor? My foot.

            SEC costs taxpayers one billion dollars a year.

            All you need are bill boards on the highway: “Investors be Warned – you are on your own. What is there about Wall Street and fraud that you don’t understand. ”

            Instead we have a billion dollar agency with a website that tells it protects investors. It creates a false sense of security. We never learn, but Ron Paul has opened our eyes.

        • Modavations

          Privatise everything

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

            … yah, privatize everything.  if the Amish can live without govt. handouts, helps or interference, so can we. The public servants went on strike in London. They thought chaos would reign at Heathrow’s customs section. It never functioned so smoothly – no lines, no hold ups. A few managers stepped in and the place hummed. They are never striking again.

    • Albert M

      I can give you 15 trillion reasons why your alternative is pure fantasy. Your children’s future has been mortgaged to the hilt.

      Read my post below. Ron Paul wants to cut a Federal bureaucracy and move the valid functions downstream to the states, as per the Constitution. Why a have Federal Dept. Education and fifty State Depts. of Education? Eminently sensible to cut govt. waste and duplication.

      Despite spending more on DC schools (per capita) than any other state in the nation, politicians send their children, for the most part, to DC’s private schools. If they are so good at running education, private schools in DC would be redundant.

      How many times does govt. have to fail you before you acknowledge that perhaps there is an alternative to the Post Office and Amtrak?

    • http://www.facebook.com/wmueller William Howard Mueller

      Communism is a fantasy? Too young to remember the USSR? What about the socialism that every single president has been pushing us towards for decades now? Is that your only reality?

    • Modavations

      Ya but communism has killed 100million peeps

      • heaviest cat

        Communism has never been tried.

        • Modavations

          I’ve heard that a million times.And after 200 die in the gulags you’ll tell us,well they didn’t do it the right way.We need another try.Listen kid,even the Kibbutz has beenthrown in the trash bin of history

          • Modavations

            200 million

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

          What a pity – go tell the Cubans, the Latvians and Estonians, East Germans, et al. Yeah, what a pity. We need to move towards the Communist model. The sooner the better. Oh, that wasn’t really Communism. Well, spare the details.

    • Anonymous

      “[L]ibertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society.” 

      http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2005/mar/14/00017/ 

      • Zero

        Unfettered capitalism in practice and communism in practices has pretty much created the same conditions.  That’s why Chinese conditions are so attractive to Michelle Backmann.

  • Anonymous

    The best possible President would be a combination of Obama and Ron Paul.

    Paul is superior to Obama in some very important ways — bring home all the troops, close the overseas bases, stop being a world empire (being an empire is a path of self-destruction for our nation).  Also, most regulation doesn’t actually work in the real, actual results — coal plants will thousands every year through emmissions, food poisoning happens everyday with the FDA on guard.  Etc.  What works instead? — financial liability for damages, which is in fact a fundamental libertarian tenet.

    Obama is superior in certain ways — understands the social contract, is open to new ideas, is able to bring new ideas on board.

    Perfect world — Obama brings Paul to the white house and learns a lot from him, and ends Afghanistan, etc., but still pushes for infrastructure investment (public roads, power grid etc.).

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Hipposelect-Lones/836567341 Hipposelect Lones

      Obama understands the social contract? What social contract? Oh, I get it. You mean the Constitution, which is the only social contract we have. The one that he has done his best to make irrelevant and shred to smithereens.

      • Anonymous

        heh heh…no, pretty much everone has *several* social contracts.  Read up.

        As to the consitution — I would *love*, love, so see Presidents *impeached* for going to war without a correct declaration of war by Congress, as required in the Constituion.

        When?  Well, even though it should have happened to about 5 Presidents already, there is no time like now to start.

        Impeach Obama, who I like, for going to war without explicit authorization.

        That would be very, very good.

        And, yes, I’ll likely vote for Obama, the lesser of many evils.

    • Modavations

      In my opinion Pres.Obama is the worst president in my lifetime and has put race relations back 50 years

  • Pingback: “An In-Depth Look at Ron Paul” on NPR, December 13, 2011 |

  • monica

    Inflation and the Fed are responsible for income inequality in this country.  Inflation makes asset prices rise (if you own stuff that’s good, if you buy stuff that’s bad!) and real wages decline (your dollar wage stays the same but the prices of the things you have to buy rises).  Eliminate the Fed and you will do more to level the playing field than all federal programs designed to do so have ever accomplished.

    • Anonymous

      The US had no FED before the early 20th century, and several economic depressions, massive bank runs, etc.

      There isn’t such an easy magic bullet.  There is a good reason for a reserve bank — it allows solvent, well-managed banks to avoid runs that would ruin and destroy some depositors or investors (I’m talking about perfectly good banks that are solvent, not about some of our big insolvent banks of today).

      • Kevin

        “Allows solvent, well-managed banks?”  Really, is that what TARP means to you?  Really?

        Someone must be paying you to say this.

        • Anonymous

          Do you think the “FED” is the same as the “TARP”?  If so, perhaps I could suggest reading up more.

    • Modavations

      Lousy education is responsible.Technical guys make big bucks and find jobs in two seconds.The usual product of the Public Schools are barely competent to work at McDonalds

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul is no messiah. Like the other GOP/TP candidates he doesn’t believe in evolution or the separation of church and state, thinks climate change is a hoax, wants to cut taxes for the rich and gut regulations and programs that protect workers, consumers and the environment. Far from a “libertarian” at the state level he is an authoritarian and a religious extremist. He would allow states to criminalize abortion, require prayer in public schools and mandate the teaching of creationism. He is not a “Constitutionalist” either. Ron Paul advocates repealing the 16th Amendment and eliminating the federal income tax (and with it almost all of the federal government [e.g. EPA, FDA, CDC, NASA, NPR, Social Security, Medicare, the Interstate Highway System, National Parks, etc.]) which would cripple our nation. Do you really want to go back to the 1800s or the age of the robber barons? I mean THINK about it! We tried a loose confederation of states. It didn’t work. Might not be so bad for those with the MEANS to evacuate from the most extreme states but it might hit the poor and less advantaged pretty damn hard. Just not the kind of country I’d want to live in.

    • Kevin

      How is calling for repeal of the 16th Amendment not “constitutionalist?”  Article V is part of the Constitution; using it is perfectly constitutionalist.

      • Anonymous

        Ron Paul picks and chooses the parts of the Constitution he likes and rejects those he doesn’t. The US Constitution provides broad powers to the Federal government to tax and spend for the General Welfare as well as to regulate interstate commerce and to protect fundamental rights. If Paul had his way states would be free to set their own inconsistent and even contradictory rules in a “race to the bottom” and to violate fundamental rights guaranteed by the US Constitution now protected at the federal level. As I’ve pointed out above Ron Paul is a religious authoritarian at the state and local levels and would allow extremists to pass the most radical social legislation (e.g. criminalizing abortion).  In 2005, Paul introduced the We the People Act, which would have removed from the jurisdiction of federal courts “any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction” and “any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation”. Despite the First Amendments prohibition against establishing religion (i.e. the Separation of Church and State) he would allow states to require prayer in public schools and require that they teach creationism. Paul also opposed the 1965 Voting Rights Act as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

          Your interpretation of the General Welfare clause gave us Social Security. The initial rate was 2%. Since then the government has raised the tax twenty times and raised the initial retirement age many times. Imagine if you had bought retirement insurance from a reputable private insurer and they tried to change the rules on you all the time. Immoral and unlawful. In addition, Congress has raided the Trusts funds, which is nothing less that legalized theft.

          One could argue that the Amish with their unsophistication, lack of basic necessities like electricity, private schooling in a minimalist sense, are prime suspects for government help at retirement. Yet, they government allowed them to opt out!

          If the Amish can take care of their own retirement, why can’t those of us with college and professional degrees to the same? Because then there won’t be a Trust fund to raid. Then we might just start to believe in ourselves and the ability to take of ourselves. Heaven forbid.

        • Guest

          Run for office in your state and make the laws YOU want to live with or, if your state laws suck and you don’t want to take the time to participate in your local government, MOVE.

          If a business is run by a bunch of racists, DON’T buy stuff from them and they will go out of business. Do you really need the federal government telling you that you need to not be racist or sexist, etc… or can you exercise a little responsibility on your own?

        • Anonymous

          Actually, diversity and competition produce better results.  Good ideas float to the top and bad ones to the bottom.  What America has under a authoritarian federal government is a mono-culture.  What does science and economics tell us about the dangers of a monoculture?  (hint:  they’re bad — real bad)

    • drofeconomy

      Where do you get your information. Your ignorance is extraordinary. And we are living in the worst age of the robber barons ever. What do you think the elite central bankers are that issue the debt which comprises all money that exists and keeps entire nations in debt using their people as the collateral slaves to pay the never ending top down flow of wealth to these elite through taxes, inflation and endless wars. Do your homework and realize Ron is the only one challenging the status quo of the military industrial complex which is destroying every last bit of humanity we have. Eliminate taxes and YOU get to choice how you want to spend your money, not have the government of parasites decide how to spend YOUR MONEY in your supposed best interests.

      • Anonymous

        As Oliver Wendell Holmes pointed out, “Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society.” 

        • Guest

          OK,Wendell  Holmes, our government collected lots of taxes the past ten years and borrowed another $9 trillion dollars. Why are we not civilized?

          We have caused the deaths of 1.4 million innocent Iraqis for the sin of living in an oil rich country. We rain hellfire missiles on innocent people in Pakistan, Yemen and who know where else, ostensibly to assassinate US citizens.

          Clearly no correlation between government revenues and civilized behavior. Singapore has the lowest taxes and they are highly civilized. Soviet Union had a virtually 100% tax rate and they were highly uncivilized.

          (AlbertM posted as guest)

          • Anonymous

            The US actually has lower tax revenues as a percent of GDP than most of the rest of the developed world. 

            http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-22/news/30427504_1_tax-revenue-state-and-local-taxes-spending

            If you are interested in “civilized” societies see my post about the Nordic countries and Social democracy above.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

            What we lack in tax revenues, we borrow. Hence, my point remains valid. The correlation between taxes and civilization is just a cute one-liner to justify a socialist approach to government.

            As we all know, the problem with socialism is that eventually the government runs out of other people’s money, as vividly illustrated by the debt crisis in Europe (Nordic countries excluded, the exception that proves the rule), and soon to come to our shores.

    • Albert M

      John, I have a job for you in mainstream media. You fit the bill perfectly: must have the ability to distort the truth, to misinform, to remain consciously ignorant of the topic or person covered, to push the establishment line.

      There are just too much drivel here to deal with (covered in part by my posts below). Readers can go to Paul’s campaign website and do some fact checking. Just take it from me, no hack in the media could have done a better job at truth distortion. Shameless propaganda, but ever so mainstream. Congrats!

      • Anonymous

        Spoken like a true acolyte. How about doing your own independent research? Dig around a little (instead of going to Ron Paul’s campaign page) and you’ll discover that everything I’ve said is absolutely accurate.

        • Guest

          Why go to a second hand source? That is so mainstream. Congrats! Hey, if you want more wars, more torture, more assassinations, more invasions, more debt, more spending, more infringements of personal liberties, more of the drug war (war on poor communities of color, as Ron Paul puts it; leads to an incarceration rate that makes Stalin’s Russia look legitimate), then Ron Paul is not for you.

          (AlbertM -I’m posting as a guest – not at my computer now)

          • Anonymous

            I just don’t want to live in a regressive, Laissez faire, Theocracy. 

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

            I agree with you – see my comment below on the Norwegian government.

            Norway has huge oil revenues and runs a 15% budget surplus. I work with a Fin and a Swede. They don’t subscribe to your Utopian view of their countries, but their success has a lot to do with the character of their people as reflected in the Transparency Index. Our monetary, regulatory and political systems have debased us as a nation. Ron Paul will restore honesty, transparency and integrity to government. You haven’t had it for thirty years under both parties (just two wings of the same predatory bird). Anyway, I grant you every right to exercise your political preferences. If you have a better candidate (especially one who will not take us to war without a Congressional declaration of war, bomb other nations, assassinate US Citizens, etc), please let me know.

          • Dave

            Well said. Getting rational responses regarding better candidates is worse than pulling teeth here.

          • Anonymous

            Ron Paul wants to cut taxes to benefit the wealthy and gut regulations that protect workers, consumers and the environment. While I doubt Paul would actually have much of an impact on reducing the size of the government or changing our foreign policy he might very well have the opportunity to nominate one or more Supreme Court Justices and push the courts even further to the right, protecting the interests of the wealthy and powerful (esp corporations) and striking down a woman’s right to choose and other important civil liberties.  Ron Pall is also opposed to campaign and lobby  reform which I think is critically important. Obama is far from perfect, just better than all the other GOP/TP candidates.  

          • nj

            What are you yammering about re Norway? Their “huge oil reserves” are highly controlled by the government. They tax carbon dioxide. All anathema to the Paul cult.

          • Anonymous

            Theocracy?  I am an athiest, and I support Ron Paul.  The man prays in private and follows the constitution.  

          • Anonymous

            The man would allow the states to criminalize abortion, mandate prayer in public schools and require the teaching of creationism.

          • rick

            I’m curious why you think Ron Paul would have us living in a theocracy? From my understanding, he wants the federal government out of our lives in just about every way possible.

          • Anonymous

            “The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs.”– Ron Paul, claiming that there is no separation of church and state, despite these writings by Founding Fathers Jefferson and Madison.

    • syzygy45

      no you would rather live in a country where companies that make weapons that kill children get taxpayer money, where we pay interest to banks who create money out of thin air, where the congress just passed abill to allow us citizens to be detained without a trial, on and on and on..this is our last chance..either ron paul or tyranny..it’s that simple. also the constitution says whatever not enumerated from the federal government belongs to the states.How is that not constituional..Wanting to overturn an amendment is part of teh rule of law..

      • heaviest cat

        45 that “choice” is rather extreme” .Given Paul’s contempt for govt regulation , he would move this country further towards corporate fascism

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

          I deal with the regulator’s paradise below, but we now have corporate fascism. Ron Paul is light years away from giving one penny of our tax dollars to corporations, whether in out right grants or tax credits – special interests have not got a hold on him, not even close.

    • heaviest cat

      I agree with most of what you say here ,JohnGraff especially that Ron Paul is no Messiah. Nor should he be. THis resonated with me because I believe that Americans tend to elect their leaders as messiahs. “Messaihs” as such have no place in a democractic government where the people must make the decisions. Messiahs belong in religion not politics. I would not vote for any candidate who claims to be the ulimate problem solver or “messiah”.

      • Steve

        I think part of the attraction of Ron Paul is that he does not claim to be a messiah or expect one to arise as an elected official.

        That is the reasoning behind limiting the role of the Federal Government.

        Now, how can we limit the role of the oligarchy that has been entrenched through years of governmental inbreeding?

        • FreeinVT

          Oh for Christ’s sake! Ron Paul tried to warn the rest of the wonderful NON-nutjobs in Washington that the financial bubble was going to happen in plenty of time for them to join him and act. They all opted to support the banks instead.

          I am tired of people who look at an honest person, with the most faithful voting record perhaps in the history of Congress and say, “this guy is crazy?!?!?!” Ron Paul has the more support from the active military than all the other candidates combined. I guess they are all nutjobs as well.

          What do you label the mindless Party Zombies who vote for the candidate that tells them what they want to hear and then DOES THE EXACT OPPOSITE?

          I was a dumb-ass who voted for Obama. I believed his BS and I WILL NOT BE FOOLED AGAIN. Look at the candidates’ voting records. Look at their history. Romney is supported by GoldmanSachs, Gingrich was drummed out as Speaker of the House for his crooked business actions.

          Take some time and actually read up on these people.

          • Steve

            FreeVT, please remain so.

      • joey_ovah_here

        Yea..and i suppose Newt is, right? Mr f’n New World Order globalist who wants to trash the country and start ww3…do your homework before talking garbage ok? Here, allow me to help you if you actually care:

        http://tinyurl.com/ctdw7sn

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClJOf7qShA4

        http://www.newtexposed.com/

        http://eli-bruton.blogspot.com/2011/12/welcome-to-newt-world-order.html

    • Anonymous

      Please study his positions if you seek to criticize him in detail.  What you have written is nonsense.

    • joey_ovah_here

      Yea..and i suppose Newt is, right? Mr f’n New World Order globalist who
      wants to trash the country and start ww3…do your homework before
      talking garbage ok? Here, allow me to help you if you actually care:

      http://tinyurl.com/ctdw7sn

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClJOf7qShA4

      http://www.newtexposed.com/

      http://eli-bruton.blogspot.com/2011/12/welcome-to-newt-world-order.html

  • Anonymous

    “In keeping with his recent efforts to look edgy, Ron Paul releases an extreme new ad!”

    http://teamcoco.com/video/ron-paul-campaign-ad-ron-bless-america

  • CRose

    I’ve loved some of the comments that have come up during the show. I admit that I listened to this show with trepidation because I was worried that it would make me wary of Ron Paul and it has. Some of his policies are more extreme than I am prepared to imagine right now. Some of his policies are too conservative. BUT! I think that he has some great points and I hope that his point of view can guide the national conversation. I don’t think the market is the answer. I don’t know the answer, but talking about the issues of ordinary folks is crucial!
    I also like the idea of moving the capitol every four  years – fantastic (probably not a money saver, but maybe we’d make due with less!)

  • N9guw13

    The “revolving door” is a big issue.  Most government employees are prohibited from working for private industry to influence government for a period of 5 yrs.  Newt just went through the door and made millions.

  • guest

    So the market method of selling raw milk is bad but selling milk with garbage in it is good?  Sounds more like monopoly than free market as we have now.

  • Modavations

    This is right up Ron Paul’s alley.The Transportation Dept.has now suggested all use of cell phones be banned in cars.100 Watt lt. bulbs are banned as of Jan.1.The Left is always in high dudgeon about the Patriot Act and prying into our private lives.Here’s a thought.Big Brtother goes hand and hand with Big Government.I’m sure Ron Paul agrees

    • nj

      More dispatches from the distant, dimly lit, fact-free planet Modatron.

      There is no ban on incandescent light bulbs. The Energy Independence and Security Act was passed with overwhelming, bipartisan support and signed by that raging leftist Dubya.

      • Ray in VT

        And next they’ll want to require that all cars have seat belts in them!  Where does the insanity end?

        • Gregg

          I think seat belt laws are as much an abomination as helmet laws. But that’s just me.

          • OIderworker

            You do? What if you were involved in an accident, and, because the occupants of a car YOU hit weren’t wearing seat belts, they were all killed?  Maybe it’s just me, but I’d prefer that there be laws re: seat belts and helmets. 

          • rick

            Well, then we don’t need the government to tell us we must wear seatbelts or be threatened with a fine or jail then do we? If some car company stopped putting in seatbelts in its cars, it would likely hurt it’s sales. So the market would do the regulation there. If someone didn’t believe that seatbelts would save their life, don’t they have the right to disagree with the government and not wear one?

          • Anonymous

            Do you need the government to tell you to wear a seatbelt, or to take food from your table should you forget?

        • FreeInVT

          The insanity ends when Ron Paul takes his oath of office.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1044084128 Adam Gagnon

          Having seat belts to protect life is a lot different from putting a ban on incandescent light bulbs.  I’m not a big fan of mercury vapor, so why do I need CFL’s again?  

      • Modavations

        100 watt bulbs are illegal as of Jan.1.Get you’re busy body hands off my lt.Bulbs.But,Moda,but Mioda,you’ll save $100.00 a year.I blow that on a good night of partying

  • Monica

    Ron Paul is the only candidate to vote for in 2012. Despite what opinions he has on religion etc he is smart enough to know it doesn’t belong in politics!

    • Roy Mac

      He is a whacked-out nutjob.  You want an OB-GYN as your president because he read some fringe books on politics and economics while he was sitting around on-call?  Maybe you’d like me–a CPA with an MBA, concentration in economics and finance–to perform your pelvic exams, since I’ve surveyed the web about female biology?

      Please!

      • whatever5678

        Well Roy, this seems like he knows a little more than internet info, besides, I think he reads a lot as opposed to using the net.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUVzKtjyWH4

        you gotta admit that’s pretty impressive

      • peaceprosperity

        Actually no, he wrote many of those books you fool.

      • Guest

        Isn’t it the CPAs with MBAs (and PhDs for that matter) that screwed our economy to hell? That OB-GYN has probably been studying economics longer than you. What’s the accounting on the candidates? Who actually has a shot a cutting the debt? You have an MBA, enlighten us.

      • Anonymous

        Was your point that one needs to be a cow to understand milk?

        -25 year congressman
        -Historian
        -Air Force veteran
        -Economist

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1044084128 Adam Gagnon

        Actually the study of Austrian economics showed him the crash was coming, and it is also what showed him prices are going to go through the roof due to all this money printing.  Is following the Constitution really that whacky?  Watching internet porn doesn’t qualify as “studying female biology” you freakin goon.

  • leftofcenter

    There are several reasons why Paul won’t get the nomination.

    Not all but many of his supporters are like many Occupy supporters. They constantly throw out slogans. Then, when you press them for actual solutions, they either try to talk past your skepticism. Or, they act like little kids who cover their ears and say I can’t hear you!

    Every member of Congress signs a loyalty oath to Israel (which directly violates their oath of office). When Cynthia McKinney says this, is she lying? Not once has anyone ever publically challenged Paul on this. Why? Because that’s “anti-semetic”? Please….

    • Modavations

      I love it when Democrats give Republicans advise on their canidates.

      • Olderworker

        I think you mean “advice” not “advise”

    • Zing

      When I say “this”, I define something.  God knows what Cynthia McKinney means when she says anything, other than she’ll do anything.   

    • Anonymous

      No solutions? You should talk to some of his supporters from the Ludvig von Mises Institute.

    • Anonymous

      Do you even know the definition of ‘Semite’?

    • Anonymous

      You’re beginning to sound a little leftofearth.

  • leftofcenter

    Some people have talked about the MSM trying to censor Paul. Yet no one bothers to mention that they did the same thing to Kucinich and Mike Gravel back in ’08. Both were legally viable candidates.

    • Anonymous

      Sure. Kucinich and Gravel are both amazing people, too. You’ll get nothing but sympathy from us on that one.

    • rick

      Except that Kucinich ended up endorsing Obama in the end. :(

    • Dquixote1217

      Don’t forget this tidbit – Kucinich wanted Ron Paul as his VP.

  • leftofcenter

    Keep in mind this is not an election. This is an ad campaign.

  • Anonymous

    There is no hope that RINOs will vote for Paul…so be it.  There is little hope that Neo-libs will vote for Ron Pau…so be it.  But there is great hope that true conservatives, libertarians, “blue democrats”, and some progressives will vote for Ron Paul.  Oh, hush now, give up your prejudices, do some research.  It’s o.k. to think.

    • heaviest cat

      why would any progressive vote for Paul?

      • Steve

        Freedom

        • Ray in VT

          I’m plenty free now, thanks.  I don’t need the freedom to have my air more polluted due to having the EPA gutted.

          • Steve

            The question is how do we vigilantly maintain the environment and freedom?

            I understand your concern for the environment and libertarian ideals may initially cause harm – but a government/industry cabal is capable of worse devastation.

          • Dave
          • Ray in VT

            That is the question, isn’t it?  I don’t claim to have the answers, and I don’t really trust anyone who claims to have simple solutions to complex problems.  What I am quite sure of, though, is that deregulation and a market-based approach to environmental problems is the wrong way to go.  I certainly don’t want government in bed with industry, because they’ll rig the game, so we need to reduce the power of these interests over our elected representatives, but, again, the question is how.

          • Anonymous

            Which do you think would have more success. Getting something done at the federal level (involving environmental issues) or the state level? Why should it always be the federal government?

          • rick

            How will libertarian ideals initially cause harm? There will be a transition, but people adapt quickly to things, especially when they stand to benefit.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

            You are like the woman on Beck’s show yesterday: “Glen, I only have you and my Bible. If Ron Paul wins it is the death of Israel.” Yah right, if Ron Paul wins we all suffocate.

            If Ron Paul wins, the troops come home, the debt stops piling up and our children’s nightmare becomes, once again, the American Dream.

          • peaceprosperity

            doh! The epa legalizes pollution by big corporations!

          • rick

            The EPA is causing more pollution and damage to our country than any one politician ever could. If you want less pollution, I’d start by looking at organizations like the EPA first. Intentions are good to regulate pollution, but like what most of what happens with government laws and regulations, a monster is created and the opposite of what is intended occurs. Seriously, I don’t even care about Ron Paul but I’m just asking that you look at this issue a little more closely.

        • Zero

          “Freedom”…really?  Is there are more meaningless word than ‘freedom’?  Maybe ‘truth’? 

          Don’t be a puppet person and echo inane words that politicians like to toss around.

          • Anonymous

            Would you prefer ‘liberty’?

          • Zero

            I don’t prefer any of it.  I prefer economic arguments with economic jargon–instead of these pseudo-morality arguments.  Just because a rich man is taxed 39% or even 60% instead of 35% doesn’t mean he lost his freedom.

          • Anonymous

            Your name is apt.

      • Dave

        From the horse’s mouth:

        “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” 

        -Ralph Nader

        Get with the times……

        http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/28/ralph-nader-hearts-ron-paul-ha

      • Anonymous

        You really must get out of the house more often.

    • Guest

      If the choice is Ron Paul or Obama, the vast majority of RINOs will vote Paul.

  • Pingback: Republicans' fanatical shunning of Ron Paul - Shooting Sports Forum

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Frank/100002494833204 Mike Frank

    As the senior admin of Herman Cain Forums now that Herman Cain has suspended we have officially endorsed Ron Paul for President, you can see our official endorsement on the
    forum home page.

  • Jack Herer

     End the War on Drugs! Vote Ron Paul, 2012!!!!!!!!

    http://www.leap.cc/

  • Zing

    He doesn’t have a chance.  But thanks for playing.

    • Anonymous

      Today’s headlines say that you are wrong.

      See you on the floor at the convention!

    • Anonymous

      Neither did the colonists. Thanks for nothing.

  • Steve

    The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States.
    One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the
    International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has
    effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more
    typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many
    emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the
    U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation:
    recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is
    blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression,
    we’re running out of time.

    From Simon Johnson

    • Dave

      Lets turn over our sovereignty to the IMF.

      • Steve

        It is not necessary to agree with the IMF or their proposed solutions in order to recognize their interpretation of the problem.

        An oligarchy in control of too many governmental institutions. 

  • Roy Mac

    This Ben kid–the Paul supporter who is also in ROTC–needs to get his head screwed on.  He has no clue about the working world, military service, politics, economics, or–evidently–much of anything else.  With supporters like him, Paul’s popular vote in Iowa will likely be in the mid-triple digits.

    • Olderworker

      Yes, I also wondered about Ben’s world view; does he not worry about his parents and grandparents if Medicare and Social Security are ended? (As Ron Paul suggests he will do if elected). 

      • Anonymous

        Unphuqueing believable!

        Please produce any evidence that Ron Paul wants to end Medicare or SS when he is elected.

        Not going to happen.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1044084128 Adam Gagnon

        He has stated multiple times that he would honor the commitments already made, and work the phase out Social Security.  He will not end it overnight.

    • Anonymous

      I think the key word here is ‘kid’. He’s a sophomore in college for God’s sake. Cut him some slack.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

    No, $920 billion in 2011, cost of wars included. The war profiteers are smiling. We are crying, losing our jobs and homes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

    Can you imagine when interest rates spike, which they surely will.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lawrence-Neal/100001209265678 Lawrence Neal

      We get 80% of our smart bombs from China.  How smart is that?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

    What has size got to do with it. If anything the smaller the country the more difficult it is to replicate 9% p.a. growth for 44 years, uninterrupted. Singapore’s per capita income was $600 44 years ago, below that of Guatemala. Now the 4th wealthiest, based on per capita.

  • http://twitter.com/BootLadyTeri23 Teri Horne

    Ron Paul is all about keeping the government out of a citizen’s life, UNLESS a woman wants an abortion. That’s where he loses me, and many women who would otherwise support him.

    • Anonymous

      But who will you vote for instead?

    • Thecagedphilosopher

      Hey Teri, Not trying to stir things up but I thought you might want to read this. It is a quote from Ron Pauls book. Your right, he does not beleive abortion is right (or A right). I used to sit back and accept that it is a womans choice, but my opinion is on the fence and falling towards ron Paul’s view. Ron Paul writes..” Some people beleive that being pro-choice is being on the side of freedom. I’ve never understood how an act of violence, killing a human being, albeit a small one in a special place, is portrayed as a precious right. To speak only of the mother’s cost in carrying a baby to term ignores all thought of any legal rights of the unborn. I beleive that the moral consequence of cavalierly accepting abortion diminishes the value of all life.” He goes on to write about how many pro choice people rarely care about choice in other circumstances involving injury only to the person making the choice( laws against smoking, bans on narcotics, and mandatory seat belts). He also writes that laws at the federal level (for or against) are not right. He writes “So if we are ever to have fewer abortions, society must change again. The law will not accomplish that. However, that does not mean that the states shouldn’t be allowed to write laws dealing with abortion. Very early pregnancies and victims of rape can still be treated with the day after pill, which would be nothing more than using birth control pills in a very special manner. These very early pregnancies coul never be policed, regardless. Such circumstances would be dealt with by each individual making his or her own moral choice.” So he is sort of both, and in a very constitutional way.

    • Anonymous

      I can identify with your grievance as I am pro-choice AND a Ron Paul supporter.  However, I do agree with him that it should be a state issue.  Think of all the boobs that get elected to federal government positions by pandering to the pro-life crowd.  I might also point out that your vote counts a lot more on the state level than it does on the federal level.  

      He is the only candidate who will end these immoral and unconstitutional wars and help to curb the ridiculous inflation and endless bailouts.  Despite your differences with him on abortion, who is better for our country?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

        It suits the GOP Politburo’s strategy to bait the vote of the Religious Right with the Pro Life issue. Bob Dole said, just keep it in the platform, but ignore it. Ron Paul is consistent. You can’t defend the life in the womb (and as a doctor he knows better than anyone else what is in the womb) and then go beyond our borders and destroy the lives on hundreds of thousands of innocent people for the sin of living in an oil rich country. These warmongering pro lifers are the worst of hypocrites.

    • ronpaul2012

      like ron paul says ..leave it up to the states to decide.just like drug laws. if california wants to legalize pot . let em .. that doesnt mean nebraska or indiana have to as well.

    • A Time for Paul

      Teri Horne says: Ron Paul is all about keeping the government out of a citizen’s life, UNLESS a woman wants an abortion.

      If that is the only issue where you part company….then I would seriously consider supporting R. Paul.  Me personally, I am not quite sure that his take on foreign policy will be totally sucessful, but, our know our current  plan of nation building, aggression, etc. is not sustainable.

      I will be voting for him in 2012! 

    • Anonymous

      Personally I refuse to determine my candidate solely on the abortion issue because there are valid points on both sides of the argument regardless of where EXACTLY I personally believe the line between protecting human life should begin.

      At least Paul has good reason to feel the way he does. He was a doctor and delivered babies for a living. Of course he’s going to want to protect what he considers a defenseless life and I think everyone can understand where that argument comes from – nobody wants to ‘kill babies’. He believes that life deserves rights at an earlier stage of development than you do, that’s the only difference.

      The abortion issue is used as a partisan tool to keep us polarized so we don’t band together and drain the swamp.

      Fight for what you believe in, but a candidate as rare as Paul shouldn’t be thrown out with the bath water because of an issue that is an honest philosophical debate IMHO. I can personally relate to your concern on this issue, but what should I do? Drop Paul and support one of these insiders who I can’t even believe is being truthful half the time? Not a chance.

  • Gregg

    I’ll give Ron Paul this, he makes me stand and scream “hell yea” at the TV more than any of the other candidates. He’s always great in the debates and had a very strong answer to the first question the other night. But then there are those other times…  I cringe.

  • argyle johansen

    Where’s the love for Gary Johnson?

    • Anonymous

      They don’t want a REAL “Libertarian” someone that opposes both fiscal and social government interference at every level from the federal to the state on down! Naturally he’s rejected by the religious right and many of the socially conservative Tea Partiers. Ron Paul is just their ticket. They want anti-government at the federal level to gut every major federal social program to help the poor, protect consumers etc. and a religious authoritarian at the state and local levels to enable religious extremists to pass the most radical social legislation (e.g. criminalizing abortion, mandating prayer in public schools, etc.)

    • Anonymous

      Hoping that he gets a position in the Paul administration.

      • Anonymous

        Undoubtedly

  • Johnmoody

    Tom,
    I hope you see my comment in the blizzard below. First, I want to say thank you for having such a good show today and treating RP fairly.

    I want to point out you gave away the farm today when talking about inequality and RP’s point… you slipped “even though we now have huge inequalities.”

    This is RP’s exact point. The government has created inequality that would make the previous ones pale in comparison. And lets be honest, while African Americans may have more of some “freedoms” because of affirmative action, we are still a deeply divided and racially segregated nation. AA and the government’s involvement did almost nothing to actually end the division between the two groups – in fact, in many ways, it made permanent what would otherwise have found over time a natural, and better, solution , like with the feds’s involvement in the food system where they are now engaging in undercover raids on Amish farmers and treating people who want raw milk as domestic terrorists and made our food supply permanently unsafe and now almost entirely compromised of junk and poison.  (www.thecompletepatient.com, or http://wp.me/p1VxSC-76).

    But again, your own comments are the biggest proof and support of RP in the whole show, though the kid from Iowa was very impressive.

    Again, my thanks,
    John

    • Ray in VT

      I would have to disagree with many of your assertions.  Economic inequality has been increasing for the past 30 years, and the data that I have seen show a pretty strong connection between Reagan’s supply-side economic approach, which drastically reduced the tax burden of the top income earners, and the growing disparity between the rich and the poor.  The gap narrowed significantly from the period of the New Deal up through the early 1980s.  We are largely back where we were in terms of the concentration of wealth now as in 1929.  Government has not created this inequality.  It has merely allowed it to re-emerge.

      I would also like to take issue with your opinion that government action was not necessary in order for minorities to gain a more equal footing in this nation.  Yes, we are in some ways a more racially divided and segregated society, but it sure seems that we are a lot better off on that front than we were 40 or 50 years ago.  Maybe things would have gotten better over time, but maybe minorities would still be sitting in the backs of buses or subject to “literacy tests” at the polls.  If the government isn’t even supposed to take action to insure the rights of all citizens, then why even bother?  Let’s just throw up our hands and say to hell with it all.

      • Johnmoody

        Ray,
        I was a econ and finance major. Your post has certain assumptions that can’t be easily discussed in a blog.  I encourage you to read Wendell Berry’s Racism and the Machine for one thoughtful analysis of how the government’s handling of slavery has basically reduced large numbers of African Americans to permanent slavery – albeit now as lapdogs to a certain political party and ideology of entitlement. While you may think this is better than sitting on the back of a bus, that is an opinion, not a fact.

        The Fed and other government policies and laws that are anti-competitive and thus deny any real competition to most of the major industries in America, not primarily Reagan’s tax policies, are mainly responsibly for the huge economic inequality we see now.  Government ag policy is responsible for the decimation of small farms and rural communities and the huge outbreak of death and disease in our nation through subsidizing industrial food and enriching large companies at the expense of the health of average people and average communities.  This has zero to do with Reagan’s tax policies and is just one example of one industry, but is true across the board.

        To try to pin it on Reagan does injustice to a complex situation and ignores the facts. 

        The government should defend citizens rights – but these need carefully defined. African Americans should have always had equal voting rights, etc.  Again, how you get from where they were to where they should be is debatable.  I am merely pointing out that where we are could easily be seen as no better, or worse, for all involved. Again, racism is a hideous, ugly thing, and I am glad I grew up with friends from many countries and many colors. That is why the making permanent of racial divides in this country saddens me so.

        What rights should the government defend?

        This is where RP is right on. No one has the right to use the government  to take my money to pay for their health care or education. No one has the right to tell me who I should and should not do business with.  Most of the talk of rights in this country is like children saying it is their right to stay up late, eat junk food, and then let the parent’s deal with the mess and consequences and they want to complain after about how tired they are and they don’t feel well.

        Government no longer is about preserving people’s right anyway, but destroying them to enlarge itself. It has become the ultimate corporate entity.

        • Huntdoc1

          Well said.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lawrence-Neal/100001209265678 Lawrence Neal

      I live in Colombia, S.A., and manage to get raw milk, cheese and butter from raw milk, and free range eggs.  There’s a world of difference.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Frank-Valdez/617231140 Frank Valdez

    How bizarre
    Of course, Ron Paul supporters want to dismantle government. There’s absolutely no understanding of what government does, so why NOT dismantle it?
    I cringe.

    • Guest

      What does government do? Wastes a lot of tax dollars while running a less than efficient operation with generally less than desired outcomes. Why dismantle it? Most of it should never have been “mantled” in the first place. :)

      For example, do we really need nutritional information on a sack of Doritos or a bottle of water?

      • Anonymous

        Yes we do. We need labels on drugs, on paint, on building materials and you know what we need government to keep the unscrupulous from doing things such as burying toxic waste and then letting builders put houses on top of the waste dump.
        Which still happens despite government regulations and oversight. In your world we would go back to air unfit to breath and rivers so polluted that they would sometimes ignite and burn for days.

        • Guest

          So, if you are a diabetic and an item you wish to consume does not provide the info you need, what do you do? What did diabetics do before mandatory labeling? How about, if a company is not providing you with a product that meets your need you don’t buy it or give ‘em a call and say, “what is the nutritional info on these terrible bag of chips”?

          There were labels on drugs before everybody and their mother had to include them. Once upon a time, they were called directions and you wouldn’t buy a drug that you didn’t know how to administer.

          If a company is a big damn polluter, we don’t buy there product and they will not be around very long. But, gee-whiz, China is such a stalwart of the environment, I guess that’s why we buy so much crap from them, right?

          Maybe, the government should just make a law that prevents the consumers from buying problematic products. Ya’ know, maybe a $100 fine for buying a product from a company that you know is causing environmental damage. At least the actual problem makers would have to pony up and not those of us who choose not to buy products that are harmful.

      • Sbolton

        For the millions of Americans with diabetes, the nutritional packaging information is part of their daily life-saving information…it’s vital to them to track what they eat to stay healthy and avoid diabetic shock and other damaging effects of their disease.

    • Stierman-in-Boise

      Like the man said most people don’t know what the Department of Interior does … Well, try living without it. The low information voters are why the Founding Fathers gave us the Electoral College.

      • revolve

        i am with those fathers who advocated–one must be educated to vote.  perhaps a civil exam should be passed every four years in order to vote.  And orgs could be established to teach civics along wit ethics and sociology and a lit class in prep for the test–outreach into poor neighborhoods and villages.  If they cant accept it–they cant vote.

        Maybe anyone with over million dollars shouldnt b able to vote.  You choose–you want wealth, or suffrage.  This way we keep power–and excessive property owners out of the game to prevent catastrophe. 

        What people fail to understand about democracy is that one shouldn’t actually vote simply for self-interest–individualism is anti-society, ant-community, anti-America–one should vote for the best possible outcome for the whole.

        The landed-gentry hate America and American rights.  And then we have the little problem of the Confederacy in our midst–America haters.  Take a drive thru the south and you will see how they fly the rebel flag above the USA flag all lhe while chanting bloody war.  The fly the flag of a racist, nazi-like fascist entity.

        • Anonymous

          Wow …. that’s just about as much leftism as can be shared in so few words.

        • Anonymous

          I think anybody in this country who does not pay taxes should be denied a vote. Get a little skin in the game and then see how much you want to spend.

      • Anonymous

        More and more are learning that they waste our dollars.

        Why do we need half of our land mass controlled by the federal goverment?

    • Journeywithinn

      It is not like dismantling..it is making it smaller so that we can afford it, corruption is gone, and we keep our Constitution. We are not supposed to be like any other country. That was the reason the US came into being. If we do not abide by our founding documents, how are we great?

      • Anonymous

        We don’t live in the 18th century anymore.
        The Founders did not intend for the Constitution to be a document written in stone. It’s not the Ten Commandments.

        Justice Breyer was on On Point recently and he did an excellent job talking about the Constitution.
        Maybe you should listen to the podcast.

        I’m always intrigued when I here people use the phrase “smaller” government. As if smaller is better or somehow that by making millions destitute will be save money. It wont. What I see in libertarian ideology is a race to the bottom or something that looks like a Banana republic. 

        • Anonymous

          I like the term Banana Republicans!

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

            Republicans and Democrats are all the same: two wings of the same predatory bird. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but hoping for a different outcome. Only Ron Paul offers an alternative to graft, greed and corruption in Washington, which is why the establishment in both parties dismiss him. Max Boot was their lackey today on this program.

          • Anonymous

            Ron Paul wants to cut taxes for the rich and eliminate regulations that protect workers, consumers and the environment just like all the other Banana Republicans. 

          • Anonymous

            Ron Paul wants to lower taxes for everybody, not just the rich. Also, I don’t see how anyone can defend our regulatory agencies anymore, they have been complete and utter failures and money sinks. Yet, we keep throwing money at them and giving them more power.

            The most pervasive economic fallacy among the masses is that business, particularly big business loves the free-market. It is simply not true, they disdain the free-market, because they disdain competition. They would rather invest in rent-seeking (cronyism), than compete to produce goods and services that improve our lives or the environment.

            Definition of ‘Regulatory Capture’: Regulatory capture is a theory associated with George Stigler, a Nobel laureate economist. It is the process by which regulatory agencies eventually come to be dominated by the very industries they were charged with regulating. Regulatory capture happens when a regulatory agency, formed to act in the public’s interest, eventually acts in ways that benefit the industry it is supposed to be regulating, rather than the public.

            Source: http://www.investopedia.com/te

            Holman Jenkins, “Let’s Restart the Green Revolution,” Wall Street Journal, February 2, 2011, (regarding how misguided agricultural & environmental policies are hurting consumers):

            “When some hear the word ‘regulation,’ they imagine government rushing to the defense of consumers. In the real world, government serves up regulation to those who ask for it, which usually means organized interests seeking to block a competitive threat. This insight, by the way, originated with the left, with historians who went back and reconstructed how railroads in the U.S. concocted federal regulation to protect themselves from price competition. We should also notice that an astonishingly large part of the world has experienced an astonishing degree of stagnation for an astonishingly long time for exactly such reasons.”

            Source: http://techliberation.com/2010

        • Kitkatt_1

          ‘We don’t live in the 18th century anymore.
          The Founders did not intend for the Constitution to be a document written in stone’  
          Is that how you treat all contracts you sign, too (mmm, suppose this should be taken out, cuz i don’t agree with it anymore, uh, yeah…this too cuz it displeases me…)

          What makes your century so much more unique and above history then the 18th? 

          Go live someplace else.

        • Huntdoc1

          What if we had no Constitution? What if the President could issue an assassination order of an American citizen? What if you could be detained indefinitely without due process? What if you were prohibited to drink the milk of your choice? What if you had no say in how much debt you owed? What if you were forced to purchase things that violated your freedom of choice? What if you were subjected to invasions of your privacy without ever being charged with a crime, or even infringing on another’s rights? Yes, we don’t live in the 18th century any longer. We certainly could be headed for much worse.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

            In a sense we have not had Constitutional government the past hundred years and in particular the past thirty years. As Jay Leno famously said: “Why don’t we give Iraq our Constitution. We don’t use it anymore.”

            As a consequence, we have mortgaged the future of our children and grandchildren with $15 trillion of debt and climbing. Our saving grace is that interest rates are low, but you can write “toast” over our American Dream if borrowers sense increased risk and require higher interest compensation for lending us money.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

      Government makes war, destroys wealth, runs up debt, bails out special interests, runs the Post Office and Amtrak, confiscates our wages, takes care of bankers and war profiteers, lies to us to win our votes and then dump us. Don’t you just love government? Yah, when’s the next war. I can’t wait.

  • Max

    I think he’s wrong about a lot but you can tell he’s sincere.  It bothers me that most  other republicans say they want government out of our lives, but then turn around and regulate things like marriage.  He has a radical philosophy, but at least its coherentPr

    • revolve

      government should be out of personal lives–not corporate lives. Corporations are not human and impact the world and your personal rights in untold billions of ways.  Business must be regulated–fiercely so that we the people can simply be.  Corporations are government–very very big government–and fascist.  free trade is a fascist agenda that seeks to make everyone peasants with the corporate-aristocracy on top.  A new world order so to speak.  Its already here. 

      The republican masses take the hook every time.  Stop voting repugnant-crat and vote third party.  libertarians defend anarcho-fascist principles.  Why is America so full of fascist lovers?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lawrence-Neal/100001209265678 Lawrence Neal

        I spell it ‘Repugnantcans’.

    • Kitkatt_1

      It’s not actually radical, it’s just what you’re not used to, all it takes is a generation to forget how things were. If we grow up with some system in place, it’s easier to assume that it was always there instead of challenging whether it is constitutional and should be done away with.

  • Sumeet Dang

    So I must say, I am incredibly intrigued by Rol Paul. I don’t necessarily agree with him on everything, but a Ron Paul america would be interesting to see. However my biggest issue with him, and I would like to see it discussed by the guest is what would he be able to do and change IF he gets elected? Considering the current climate we find Congress in. And considering what Obama promised during his campaign and what he was able to get accomplished during his time in office. Do you think Paul will not have to deal with the same backlash that Obama has been struggling with?

    • Ray in VT

      A lot of the things the Congressman Paul talks about doing would need majorities in Congress, and I doubt that he could get those on many of his issues.

      I don’t think that I would like to live in Ron Paul’s America.  I would, however, be willing to give him a chance to try it out.  I believe that Texas pays more to the Feds than they get back.  I say that we let them keep it, wall the place off, and then give them a couple of decades to see how it plays out.  It’s pretty much a lost cause down there anyways, so how much worse could it get?

      • Anonymous

        Lost cause in Texas?

        In spite of Perry, the people are still heading here in droves.

        Enjoy that five months of winter, Ray!

        • Ray in VT

          I will.  I like the cold, and I hate the heat.  If people want to go there, then fine, let them.  I hope that they enjoy the drought and the wildfires.

      • Kitkatt_1

        and why is Texas a lost cause exactly? 

    • ronpaul2012

      well….the first thing he would do is start bringing home the troops. check out infowars . com . alex jones asked ron paul that very question . i was very impressed by what dr paul had to say … ron paul 2012 occupy the republican party . end the wars … on drugs … on america … and ohh yea .. end the fed

      • Brian Kee

        Please, don’t bring Alex Jones into this.  Ron Paul is gaining mainstream traction, don’t drag idiots like him into the mix to make it easy to dismiss us Ron Paul supporters.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Albert-Meyer/1217985635 Albert Meyer

          Yes, Alex Jones happens to support Ron Paul, but the bulk of Ron Paul supporters have no truck with Alex Jones, although I have no reason to demonize him. I believe in free speech and will defend Alex Jone’s right of spread his ideas, although they don’t  interest me for the most part.

    • joey_ovah_here
  • http://www.facebook.com/averyhackmann Avery Hackmann

    Max Boot is completely wrong. He comes off as a war-hungry neocon that would like to keep American boots on the necks of sovereign governments all around the world.

    • Jay

      That’s exactly what Max Boot wants to do.

  • Dave

    Latest Iowa Poll, Gingrich 22%, Paul 21% !!!

    Fox News Machine scrambling to erase Paul from the narrative…

    Hilarious, inspiring!

    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_IA_1213925.pdf

  • Dave

    Anti-war, anti-banker Dems and Independents….  

    Register Republican to vote Ron Paul in the primaries….Then vote whatever you want in the general…

    http://www.bluerepublican.org/

  • Mike

    OMG!  Max Boot!!?!!  He’s the most despised Neocon America hater around.  WTF!!!!?!!!  You might as well put Bill Kristol on the show.

  • Anonymous

    “Ron Paul is a conservative. He wants to repeal the Civil Rights Act, privatize public education, abolish Social Security, kill Medicare, re-establish DADT, eliminate public housing, abolish federal student loans, kill Planned Parenthood, end the Departments of Energy and Education and the EPA, abolish the minimum wage, end affirmative action, disagrees with equal pay for women, and wants to end FEMA. He is a dangerous individual who believes in mixing religion and government. Ron Paul would allow fundamentalist Christians to control the government, the very people who would end the personal liberties he claims to fight for. Ron Paul would destroy every good thing liberals have stood for and fought hard to gain over the last 100 years. By comparison, Ronald Reagan was more liberal than Ron Paul and any self-respecting liberal voter would be wise to reject him and his destructive agenda.”
    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/05/16-ron-paul-quotes-that-prove-he-is-not-a-liberal/

    • Anonymous

      The smell of flopsweat in the morning!

      Dangerous he is ….. to the status-quo.

      • Anonymous

        Sorry I don’t have an army of Ronbots backing me up. But I am surprised that so many folks buy Ron Paul’s snake oil and fail to think for themselves. I am also disappointed that so few challenge his nonsense. That he’s even being considered as a serious contender shows the desperate straights we are in as a country.   

        • Kitkatt_1

          Ronbots, lol, cute. Whatever makes you feel better I suppose. Yeah, there is a reason that the media didn’t want to acknowledge him and finally is starting to, and it has nothing to do with Ron Paul ‘nonsense’. Hearing someone speak the truth finally is what generates so much support for him and the media has no choice in the matter anymore because people see through their tactics of trying to silence Ron Paul. People love the philosophy and love our country, not just the man. Perhaps you should cut your salary to help this country out as Ron Paul volunteered to do when he becomes president instead of blathering about stupid things just to be contrary. Learn to think instead of spewing a party line please.

    • Infowarrior76

      Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist. He wants to allow people the freedom to homeschooling, private schooling, and end centralized schooling.  He wants to people not to be dependent on the welfare state and to be able to take care of themselves.  He believes in a free market where the government is not centrally planning the economy and telling us what is good for us. You say he doesn’t believe in equal pay for women, but he really believes that individuals should be treated as individuals. RON PAUL 2012!

      • Anonymous

        Ron Paul thinks Social Security and Medicare (and just about everything else the federal government does) is unconstitutional. He misreads the Constitution picking and choosing the parts he likes and rejecting others (e.g. separation of church and state). His view would literally rip this country apart.

        http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/15/166363/paul-ss-medicare-slavery/

        • Kitkatt_1

          It’s obvious that you haven’t actually bothered researching Ron Paul in an unbiased way. If you did, you’d understand that he doesn’t ‘pick and choose the parts he likes’, get your facts straight, at least to save face.

        • Rand

          Please remind me again of where the separation of church and state can be found in the Constitution? I don’t know how Dr. Paul could “pick” or “choose” a part that isn’t there. 

          Why don’t you do some research for yourself instead of believing everything you hear is correct.

          • Anonymous

            “The phrase “separation of church and state” (sometimes “wall of separation between church and state”), attributed to Thomas Jefferson and others, and since quoted by the Supreme Court of the United States, expresses an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The First Amendment reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….”, while Article VI specifies that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase “separation of church and state” in this context is generally traced to a January 1, 1802, letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury, Connecticut, Baptist Association, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams—who had written in 1644 of “[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world”— Jefferson wrote, “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”[1]Jefferson’s metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In its 1879 Reynolds v. United States decision, the court allowed that Jefferson’s comments “may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment.” In the 1947 Everson v. Board of Education decision, Justice Hugo Black wrote, “In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state.”[2]” 

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

          • Dave

            That’s true and a good post. Once libertarian types fully divorce themselves from the shackles of authoritarian social conservatives, they will go mainstream, and we will have progress.

            http://reason.com/archives/2010/07/12/where-do-libertarians-belong

            Check out the Lindsey position.

            That being said, to be true to liberty, if Tebow wants to genuflect as an individual, or someone wants to pray in a quiet moment, that should be up to them, not me, just because I’m an atheist.

            Its the picking and choosing and arbitrary coercion against people that breeds so much resentment and division in this country. 

            Protect the “separation”, but leave individuals the right to think and say what they want, short of incitement etc.

    • Anonymous

      Wow. Sounds like utopia.

    • Kitkatt_1

      you’re still more then welcome to contribute your money to those organizations or to form your own, I’d prefer to decide on where my hard earned $$ goes thank you very much

  • Rfallin

    Max Boot is a LIAR, which is just what I would expect from someone from the Council on Foreign Relations.  While AMERICA FIRST was popular with the American public during the 1930s, it had NO effect on FDR, who continued US imperialist policy of stationing troops in China and who feigned “neutrality” while committing acts of war against Germany (“Lend-lease”) and Japan (the oil embargo).  Boot’s comments about “stability” are a joke, considering our undeclared wars of aggression in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, etc.  Even the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says our empire is unsustainable.  Whatever Ron Paul’s responsibility for the racist newsletters, the decision by Congress to make America a battlefield and make all of us subject to murder, torture or indefinite internment by out “beloved” president, makes any such criticism of Congressman Paul pretty trivial, by comparison.

    • Jay

      He’s a liar and a warmonger.

      • Anonymous

        Know thy enemy

    • Anonymous

      Oh please, stationing troops in China in the 30′s?
      Do you mean the Flying Tigers? Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931. The British had a huge garrison in Singapore.
      The US was aggressive towards Nazi Germany?
      Talk about revisionist history. I’m sure there are some people in Poland, France, Belgium, Denmark, Holland, and Great Britain who will take issue with this notion.

  • Shark Man

    Ron Paul is the opposite of the prototypical lying, cheating, partisan, deficit-spending, world empire-building constitution-ignoring narcissist politician we all constantly complain about. If we continue to play “right versus left” politics in Washington, fail to balance our budget, and continue to allow the gradual installation of a surveillance state, we will deserve the collapse we are about to experience.

    • Kentchris

      Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of the republican party. Because he is such a minority candidate he can say anything he wants without the worry of implementing it. How would he get anything done as president when a large part of the GOP despises his ideas reguarding the military and foriegn policy and the Democrats despise his laises-faire anti regulation capitalist ideas.

      • Shark Man

        Well the president alone controls the troops, so his foreign policy for the most part could be implemented immediately. As for the democrats, those congressmen and women who refuse to sign the *reasonable* budget reductions Paul presents will have to be voted out and replaced (Paul’s “plan to restore America doesn’t touch medicaid, social security, or childrens/veterans benefits). So the only reason we wouldn’t be able to return to SOME fiscal sanity under a Paul presidency would be partisan politicians who would be voted out because if America elects Ron Paul, that would mean the country is behind him.

      • Dave

        UNCLE!!!  Please Wall St. can I have another!!!

  • http://twitter.com/NOVAdaytrader NOVA

    Ron Paul for FREEDOM!

  • Colin Hagan

    As a Student at a University in Iowa, I can assure you that I will be making the 6 hour trip HOME to Iowa to Caucus for Ron Paul with 10 of my friends. I know it’s popular to say that students/young voters won’t be showing up at the caucus – but none of the supporters I know won’t be there. Just a heads up -we’re showing up. 

    • Anonymous

      @Colin, way to go!  The rest of us have to wait our turn, but we support you 100% and all eyes will be on I@c7b502e4cb86dce9d05ff2303000bd87:disqus owa!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1337272388 Laurie Seekins-Shuck

    Ron Paul for president!  I registered Republican so I can vote for him! I Love that guy!  End the wars! End the Fed!

  • Dbman63

    Fringe books on economics? Hayek did win a Nobel prize…

    • Anonymous

      “There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, [a minimal level] of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision.” – Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom
      http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/hayek_on_social_insurance.html

      • Dave

        Exactly. Nothing to fear.

        • Anonymous

          If only the current GOP/TP were so “moderate.” I have actually heard Adam Smith called a “communist” because he appears to have advocated progressive taxes.

          “The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”

          – Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations

          • Dave

            By all means continue to speak up. But please don’t throw out the Paul baby with the GOP bathwater.

  • http://police-state-watch.blogspot.com/ JTWilliams

    Max Boot? Are you freaking kidding me. That guy is a noted neoconservative psychopath. It’s disgusting that NPR would put such a man on the radio to talk about Ron Paul. That’s like putting Ayn Rand on the radio to talk about FDR!

  • http://twitter.com/TexasUncensored Texas Uncensored

    Ron Paul is right about everything.   I am 60, and haven’t seen a candidate this good in my life.    Everyone we know is voting for Ron Paul.  
    Vote Ron Paul 2012

    • Who is Cato the Younger?

      Everyone I know too. Texas is Paul country. Thats why they cancelled our Straw Poll due to ‘lack of interest’ in establishment cantidates.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XXUI2U5IPS7IABBMSM4I27BYDA chris

        there’s an “unofficial” straw poll at Reliant Stadium in Houston, Jan 11, I believe.

        See you there!

  • Anonymous

    Well of course Max Boot is going to pan Ron Paul.  Just look up Max Boot on Wiki — he’s the anti-Ron Paul.  Born in Moscow, considers himself a Wilsonian. Boot supports what he calls American imperialism based on nation building and the pursuit of spreading democracy across the non-Western world.   Everything that most of us DON’T want to do! Boot is a self-important fool.

    Ron Paul 2012!

  • http://twitter.com/the_chiefe71 The Chiefe

    I would like chickenhawks like Max Boot to form their own military paid with their money, become fighter air force pilots and bomb whatever U-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan they want to bomb. Just don’t ask for my tax money to finance his dreams. Or ask for Federal Reserve to print more money for it.

  • MarxMarvelous

    Max Boot is a modern day Alger Hiss or Bernard Baruch…traitors to the American way of life.

  • Shark Man

    Ron Paul is a legend.

  • joey_ovah_here

    If you truly care about America and your vote, then you need to read
    this following information so you can see what Newt really is about, and
    i guarantee you, you’ll cringe even more and change your mind
    instantly. This is our last chance to get it right.

    http://tinyurl.com/ctdw7sn

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClJOf7qShA4

    http://www.newtexposed.com/

    http://eli-bruton.blogspot.com/2011/12/welcome-to-newt-world-order.html

  • http://gameoflols.com zilong

    As crapulent as Ron Paul and his racist McVeigh-lite BS is, Max F***ing Boot? Are you kidding me? He’s a joke among jokes. 

    • Brian Kee

      Max Boot has never seen a country he did not want to invade.

    • Anonymous

      Nobody has ever heard Paul say a racist word in his life, and he’s probably quoted Dr. King more often than anyone in the race. McVeigh-lite!? Who fed you this crap?

      • Lap Dogs.

        Shamnity and Bill-O the clown.

        • Dave

          You know when misguided liberals and Fox news anchors get on the same page, something important is happening.

          Real grassroots folks with progressive personal values, are beginning to see that Paul’s constitutional approach is the best way to stop the banking/war machine that threatens our freedoms to live out our personal values.

          Progressives are starting to realize that liberty and diversity, as do centralized, corruptible control and suppression go together.

          With diversity, you may not like your neighbors views, but he cannot shut you down or vice-versa, or rally the power of government to enforce his world view.

          Let alone the Corporatism……

          Ralph Nader knows what he is talking about:

          “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” 

          http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/28/ralph-nader-hearts-ron-paul-ha

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Carmody/746143427 Aaron Carmody

      I swear the media pays people to post stupid comments about Ron Paul..

      • http://gameoflols.com zilong

        I swear comments like this make you guys look like paranoid white survivalists

        • Dave

          I can’t believe Sean Hannity actually posts on this blog!

          I noticed he started trotting that stuff out yesterday, as RP surges in Iowa, and the Fox/GOP/Neocon establishment panics…..

          • http://gameoflols.com zilong

            Iowa means nothing. I will revisit this post in three months, let’s see how things play out k?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1044084128 Adam Gagnon

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGhv3paNz6U

      My brother tried to pull the racist crap out on me, but had nothing to say when he found out the President of the NAACP (Austin branch) is a friend of his and says he is not racist by any stretch of the imagination.

      • http://gameoflols.com zilong

        please. Look at RP before he went national and needed to clean up his image. the guy put his name on a piece of crap white survivalist newsletter that for years ran incredibly racist bs stories. i could give two craps what the NAACP says, I prefer to actually look at what RP has written. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/britt.lowie Britt Lowie

      How deep Zilong, you have proficiently stated your point clearly and intelligently. I am glad Americans have moved past screaming “racisms!” at every turn and no longer resort to name-calling as a means to speak on subjects that are way beyond their feeble comprehension. Bravo Sir!

      • http://gameoflols.com zilong

        Black teenagers sure are “fleet of foot” aren’t they? Nothing racist about that statement. 

  • Circa1989

    Ron Paul 2012!

  • czernel

    On December 16, 2007, on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, Ron Paul supporters shocked the political establishment when they raised an amount estimated at $6.6 million from over 58,000 individual contributors to Paul’s campaign.
    The website “teaparty07.com” was used to get pledges for this event. Here is the USA Today ad in PDF format: http://mysite.verizon.net/nathanielyao/USA_Today_final.pdf 
    On December 16, 2011, Ron Paul supporters are again raising money for the Champion of the Constitution. There are over 110,000 individual contributors to his 2011 campaign moneybombs so far. 
    Let’s all dig deep and give $100, $200 or more to the good Doctor on December 16. Let’s thank him for fighting for our personal liberty and freedom for years. Let’s thank him for his unwavering support of the Constitution. Let’s thank him for being the one political candidate not bought by lobbyists and big business.
    This is the website you make a pledge at: http://www.teaparty11.com
    This is where you make your donation on December 16, 2011: http://www.ronpaul2012.com
    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” – Ron Paul 2013

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Carmody/746143427 Aaron Carmody

    Hero. nuff said.

    Ron Paul 2012!

  • Patrick

    Ron Paul: Hero to the Obama campaign, which is the only thing that stands to benefit from his candidacy.

    Run Ron Run!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Carmody/746143427 Aaron Carmody

      Ron Paul will Crush Obama.

    • Anonymous

      You obviously haven’t seen how Ron Paul polls with independents and liberals.  Ron Paul puts California into play.  Obama is terrified of a Ron Paul run.

      • Patrick

        No way.  Ron Paul will pull way more of Mitt’s (or -shudder- Newt’s) support than Obama’s

        • Anonymous

          He’s on the R ticket Pat, not running as an independent.  I have been on enough Obama sites to see that those with a head on their shoulder are allready worried about Paul taking the “Obama youth vote” and how they need to spread the word that Paul is a Nazi.  Yeah right, that’ll work.

    • Antodav

      Try again. Ron Paul is the only candidate in the Republican field who has the ability to win over enough moderates and independents to defeat Barack Obama in the general election. A Paul nomination would be Obama’s worst nightmare.

  • Fooled Once.

    I wasted my peace vote on The War Criminal Obama in ’08. Ron Paul will destroy him in 2012!

    • Dcarkuff

      There are lots of folks like you.  A lot of people had high hopes for Obama.  Although I campaign for Dr. Paul, I felt relieved that Obama beat McCain.  Little did I now what a lizard Obama was.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Carmody/746143427 Aaron Carmody

    Whoever in the audio clip is saying that america is underwriting peace worldwide is deluded. THe onyl reason our military is in those countries is to secure our financial interests.

    Everyone knows that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Carmody/746143427 Aaron Carmody

    Max, ” I think he has had very little impact” speaking as to if Ron has been a factor in the debates.

    what a joke!

  • http://twitter.com/jimineymoridin Jimmy Gipson

    its ron paul or nobody… on my ticket.

    I will not vote for one of the sold out, piece of trash, puppets like gingrich or perry. they do not hold the best interests of our nation first. they advocate more wars and less liberty, and they have not a damn clue about the monetary crisis that is unfolding as I type. CFR… need I say more? have you read any of the globalist BS gingrich has written?

    read this article about his philosophy…

    http://www.amnation.com/vfr/​archives/021106.html

    is this the type of man that we truly want to manage our national affairs? someone who professes the dissolution of nation states, religions, and cultural differences for a merger into a planetary society? does this sound like someone who will defend the Constitution? not on your life…. actually, IT IS ON YOUR LIFE. and your childrens…. because if this globalist trash has his way we will begin a world war…. and then right in the midst of it, they will PULL THE RUG FROM UNDER THE AMERICAN PEOPLE… with the economic collapse of all time, and the death of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency….

  • Dave

    From Comments section of:
    http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/13/ron-paul-rising/?hp
    “Ron Paul IS the only one who can beat Obama:
    One of three things is going to happen:1. Ron Paul doesn’t get the nomination and runs as a third party candidate: The new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll suggests Ron Paul would win 18 percent as a third-party candidate running against Obama and Romney. Obama wins.
    2. Ron Paul drops out: fervent and stubborn Ron Paul supporters stay home or write him in. Obama wins.3. Ron Paul gets the GOP nomination: Ron Paul gets the following voters:
    (A) 2008 Obama voters who thought they were going to get ‘Change’(B) 2008 Obama voters who voted to end the wars.(C) The VAST majority of the Independent vote,(D) The entire GOP voting block who dislikes Obama enough to vote for Ron Paul instead.(E) Ron Paul supporters coming out to vote in DROVES.(F) Same-sex couples who want to be set free.(G) Democratic, disillusioned Anti-Drug war voters.(H) Libertarians.
    Ron Paul and America wins! 
    No other candidate can get the votes that Ron Paul can get.”

  • Ron Shirtz

    I laugh when mainstream media wonders why Ron Paul is doing so well. They debase and dismiss him on one hand as being “unelectable”, yet are amazed by his poll numbers and hard core organized following.

    He doesn’t fit comfortably within their narrow yardstick to measure politicians. Which reveals that he media
    judges the value of candidates based on their on style, soundbites, and how well they play the game.

    It’s Ron Paul’s message that is upsetting the status quo. Many claim his positions are impractical, yet our current “business as usual” from the Republican and the Democrats parties have only brought us tremendous debt and unending warfare.

    Its ironic that he is considered radical because his positions have their roots in Constitutional principles established by the Founding Fathers. Like Washington, Jefferson and others, he is a rebel and a revolutionary against excessive power and a proponent for personal liberties–Something many today have traded for a mess of welfare and warfare pottage.

  • Anonymous

    Look NPR! Understand things are way way way worse than nearly anyone in the media will admit! All the financial markets in a state of rigged phoney chaos. This is no real market for; mortgages, stocks, bonds and even gold. This isn’t subtle stuff, it’s MASSIVE, and it’s real easy to understand when you do a little reading outside the box. Europe is breaking up NOW, not in a year, it’s happening NOW! Capital flight is well underway in the  PIGS. Money is screaming out of those already broke banks and sovereigns. Europe has trillions of debt to roll over next year, and there are NO BUYERS! They cannot fix this. The PIGS will default and very soon as they must to print their new/old currencies and immediately bailout their banking sectors. What does this have to do with Ron Paul? EVERYTHING! We are in a massive KENYESIAN COLLAPSE! The debts will NOT be repaid, it’s a bad joke. Ron has called this for years and HERE IT IS! You wonder why he is popular. Because he knows what is going on, he is an Austrian Economist, well schooled too. The Austrian/Von Mises economists are being proven correct, RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW! There is no GREY AREA! Actually, the collapse was in 08 but the flooded the markets and rigged them to death to hold on as long as they could. That has been all the way until now! It’s over man, get your heads around it.

  • Slipstream

    I like Ron Paul.  He seems like a decent and honest man who wants to do right by America.  But to me he also represents an outdated vision of America, a kind of rural libertianism and a retreat to the past.  Like Pat Buchanan from a few years back – altho their views are different – he is a nostalgia candidate.  He wants us all to be livin in that nice small town in farm country, where a man’s handshake is his contract and nobody asks too many questions about those 2 middle aged women sharing a house yonder.  And his scheme to demolish huge swaths of the federal government is not particularly realistic and would surely run into some opposition.

    • Dave

      Yeah, the tangle of complicated, over-lobbied, loophole-ridden, corporate written, Wall St-benefitting and Fed-fueled corruption of self government should be left in the hands of experts like, Greenspan, Rubin, Frank, Dodd, Geithner, Bernanke, Paulson and Summers.

      If self-government and vigilance is too challenging for you, perhaps you could live in China or other places where the elite can keep track for you.

    • Dan

       SO you have have us stream head on into the future with the Status Que? Your view of going backward is unfounded and unverifiable at best. as for the two women, what would you suggest, we send in the goon squad to make sure they are not different from you? And as for wiping out those 5 departments, the opposition you speak of will arrive soon enough if we don’t change things now. We’re broke, don’t you get it?

    • Ron Shirtz

      If you think Ron Paul’s message is outdated, how’s the Patriot Act, Warrantless wiretapping, TSA molesters, Executive military interventions, TARP bailouts of corporations with our tax dollars, the Fed loaning our money out to other countries, and 15 trillion and rising national debt working for you?

      Presidents FDR, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama all thought they had the best modern vision on how to make America great. So far I am less than impressed, and think Ron Paul’s limited constitutional
      approach is the best way, the only way, to fix the mess we are in now.

      I’ve had it with spending more money, borrowing more money, lending more money, and printing more money to solve our problems. Same with having our military project force all over the world like we own the place.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MGUMEJOVHAXVTI6STAE2MX56CI Ed

      Maybe going back is NOT such a bad thing after all America might have been better 30,40,50 years ago. When we still prayed in our schools, Said the pledge of Alligence to the Flag, Celebrated Christmas, Respected our elders, a man got up on a bus or anywhere else and gave a woman his seat. At a baseball game everyone removed their hats to sing the National Anthem.
      Maybe we were better off before government didn’t try to dictate how much salt you but on your food or what you eat. Maybe we need more men who’s handshake is their word?
      As a government employee and a  20+ year military veteran trust me Sir there are plenty of departments that are a waste of tax payer money. I have seen plenty of waste and abuse intentional or not.

      • Dave

        Just be careful with all the dictates you seem to want to bring back. We can enjoy liberty and the freedom to choose to do those things or not, without.

        We have had enough of the authoritarian GOP and its theocratic and paternalistic ways.  Liberty is the future.

      • nj

        Selective nostalgia is so warm and fuzzy…

        Let’s go back to when blacks were lynched, women couldn’t vote, people worked in sweat shops, insecticide was sprayed on kids running behind the truck, gas was leaded, rivers caught on fire…

        And people no longer celebrate Christmas now. Who knew?

  • Berthe

    Ron Paul is not going to get rid of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.  The cuts he proposes are mainly from foreign expenditures and he has said that he “would not go there first” (Social Security, etc.) to balance the budget.  There is plenty, plenty, plenty to cut from the budget elsewhere.

  • Pingback: N.H. Primary 101: Inside Ron Paul’s Granite State Surge | Radio Boston

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul is the ONLY anti-war candidate. That alone gets him my vote.  That aside I agree with at least 90% of what he says.

  • http://profiles.google.com/richard.carpenter7 Richard Carpenter

    Ron Paul is a threat to trillions of dollars for millions of powerful people all over the world. Those people did not get where they are by respecting “the democratic process” or any other cliches. They count the votes. But we have to start somewhere. 
    Does anyone care what Nelson Rockefeller said in the 1964 primaries? Of course not. How about Barry Goldwater?  He launched Ronald Reagan’s political career. Ron Paul will launch the careers of others who will end the Fed and end our useless empire. Fifty years from now Newt, Mitt, and Barack will be long forgotten. Ron Paul will be remembered.  

  • http://profiles.google.com/marcello.donato Marcello Donato

    There is only one with the consistent record of Ron Paul. This is our last chance to elect him. The country will be better off for it.

  • Anonymous

    Gee, a politician that gives it to the people straight.  No B.S., no pandering.  Are the masses ready for it, or do they want to be fed more of the same pablum they have ingested for the last 40 years?  At 53, I am ready for a real change in how business is done in DC.  I cannot believe people that want us to continue these mindless, endless wars.  There are actually people out there that believe we will be INVADED by Iran if we get the hell out of the Middle East.  What will the Iranians do, rent Princes Cruise ships to make their dash across the ocean?  For those of you quaking under the covers in fear of “terrorists”, be a real American, grow a pair, and let’s stop borrowing from China to be the world police.

  • John Reading

    Ron Paul does not exist.  I know about these things.  I watch TV.
    tinyurl.com/sofboys

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MGUMEJOVHAXVTI6STAE2MX56CI Ed

    Ron Paul will be the Republican Nominee or we can keep this failure of a President for another 4 years. YES GOP I hope you are listening to “We the People” loud and clear…

    “RON PAUL or NONE AT ALL”

    GOP, GOP, GOP we have you and only you to thank for this country being lead by Obummer, you ran a terrible campaign in 2008…You made old tired ass John McCain the maverick (LOL) and the Pretty Air Head that joined him on the ticket that was the best you had to put in the race in 2008 SHAME ON YOU!!!!

    AND now you have the ordasity to tell us the Mitt is the Savior in 2012 are you serious Mitt Romney is a phony as phony as the Republican Party has become. Your current Speaker of the House is weak and the last 4 years of George W Bush were insignificant to say the least.
    Put Join McCain out to the pasture he’s an old horse. Rick Perry sound as dumb as George W. Bush did with his “Mission Accomplished” banner. 
    ***ALERT*** This 20+ year veteran of the US military agrees that the defense budget can sustain at least a 10-15% cut and still be able to defend our country. Key word here DEFEND OUR COUNTRY not defend other countries or defend the interest of American countries overseas, these wars have been about profit for the KBR’s, Lockeed Martin, CACI and other companies in the enormmous defense industry. There is PLENTY of waste and abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan PLENTY. Arabic Linguist making 200K a year tax free and your tax dollars still pay for their 3 meals a day.
    WAKE UP AMERICA…WAKE UP, RON PAUL 2012 or NONE AT ALL!!!!

  • Pingback: In depth look at Ron Paul on NPR « InvestmentWatch

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul (and Hayek) are wrong! 

    “In strong and vibrant democracies, a generous social-welfare state is not a road to serfdom but rather to fairness, economic equality and international competitiveness.”

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-social-welfare-state

    “Half a century ago, the free-market economist Friedrich von Hayek argued that a large public sector would threaten democracy itself, putting European countries on a ‘road to serfdom.’ Yet the Nordic states have thrived, not suffered, from a large social welfare state, with much less public-sector corruption and far higher levels of voter participation than in the US. According to Transparency International, the Nordic countries have the world’s least corrupt political systems (with Iceland and Finland ranking as the least corrupt), while the US, with its big money politics, is fairly far down on the list.”

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sachs110/English

    Why not do a program with Jeffery Sachs discussing ideas that have actually been tried and which work?

    • Dave

      Your isolated nordic country point has been rebutted thoroughly and rationally earlier in this blog.  In addition, since as you have noted, Hayek and other with classical liberty views have accepted that some form of a limited safety net is reasonable, takes alot of wind out of the normal “liberty” fear mongering people like to trot out.

      The point is to have safety net behavior and dependency culture and “money-tree” attitude, to be the exception, not the rule, whereas many in Europe and here today, with naive Marxist sympathies, think in terms of utopian government provision as the core of things.

      • Anonymous

        Sachs uses the Nordic countries as a particularly good example of a much wider phenomenon that can be found in many other European countries and around the world. 

        More people are satisfied in heavily tariffed nationsThe social market economy seeks a middle path between socialism and laissez-faire economic liberalism (i.e. a mixed economy), combining private enterprise with government regulation to establish fair competition, maintaining a balance between a high rate of economic growth, low inflation, low levels of unemployment, good working conditions, social welfare, and public services, by using state intervention.   It works.

    • Govt dependent

      Ron has been accurate on the following:

      The decline of the dollar through inflationary measures controlled by a few which benefit the wealthy and elite.

      Government involvement in various aspects of the economy resulting in waste, fraud, and skyrocketing costs which benefit the few. Obvious examples are college loans (resulting in ridiculous tuition costs) housing, banking, and medical. Every time the government intervenes, the cost increases dramatically due to reduced competition and guaranteed payouts.

      He was one of the few lone voices telling us that we would be at war for much longer, at greater costs, and at our own detriment. Well, 10 years later was he wrong?

      Ron Paul served as a physician, accepting reduced payments and providing free treatment to his patients while never declining them. He refuses to accept Congress’ Benefit plan calling it “hypocritical and immoral”. His belief of returning more programs to the states allows for actual accountability closer to each individual where more efficiency and effectiveness can exist.

      I agree more with Ron Paul than any other politician, by far. He isn’t bought and paid for, accepts no lobby junkets, and practices what he preaches.

      The corporate media and both wings of the Big government party will lie, distort, and treat him and his ideas as “radical” or in your case, wrong. With our unfunded liabilities, exploding debt, and never ending wars – the status quo or even worse, a more dependent society, will lead us further into apathy and debt.
      While society progresses, the principles of liberty and freedom should not have to be compromised for security, we’ll end up with neither.

    • http://profiles.google.com/insidiom Christopher Dawson

      John – I think there may be other factors at play here.  If I’m not mistaken, most of the Nordic people are very similar in ethnicity and religion.  I could be wrong but I would agree that a more Socialist government would work in a more homogeneous society, though.  Kind of like a very large tribe.

      • Anonymous

        “But how replicable are the Nordic successes? These countries have small populations, easy access to international trade, natural resources, and peaceful neighbors. Most notably, they are ethnically homogeneous, so that social divisions are more amenable to compromise. However, this means that the challenge of maintaining a strong social welfare state in ethnically and racially diverse societies such as the US is not economic, but one of promoting respect and inclusiveness.” — Jeffrey Sachs

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Medina/670702747 Paul Medina

      Sweden is the most prosperous of the nordic countries, and yes it has many welfare programs, but it has a lot of economic freedoms, the govt let’s businesses thrive, it’s rated highly on the economic freedom index (google). It understands that you need entrepreneurship to be able to produce resources to then redistribute, that’s why Sweden was first a very rich free market economy before turned more welfare in the 1950′s. And compared to other rich countries it actually has grown slower in the past 60 years, so actually it’s economy was growing faster before it went soft socialist. In contrast look at Singapur, wages are increasing faster with one of the worlds highest and it’s pretty free market, low regulations and low taxes even though it does have some welfare programs, but it doesn’t represent much of it’s GDP.

      • Anonymous

        Growth is good provided the benefits don’t all go to a tiny few. Personally I’d rather have slightly slower growth shared more evenly. Singapore is hardly a libertarian paradise. Not exactly the kind of society I want to live in either. 

    • Anonymous

      Here’s a great article about the Nordic Model and whether it can be applied outside of Scandinavia.

      http://www.globalutmaning.se/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Davos-The-nordic-way-final.pdf

      Well worth the read!

  • Dave

    So you like Ron Paul except on Foreign Policy?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8NhRPo0WAo&feature=youtu.be

  • D.A.

    Max Boot is a lying fraud who profits greatly off military empire and official mass-murder.

    No wonder he is all jammed up over the mere thought of Ron Paul.

    F___ you, Max Boot. You national-socialist dung beetle.

    And shame on you, NPR, for having that long-discredited charlatan as a guest and letting him go practically unchallenged with his Orwellian BS. (Not that you didn’t do it intentionally, knowing that Ron Paul is the only GOP threat to your beloved Dear Leader Obama, or anything like that…)

    Btw, Tom: That was really “professional” of you to wait until the very end to take that “anonymous caller” who talked about the fantastical “racism” issue. Surely, you’ll earn many brownie points from CJR and Poynter for such a clever smear-job. Never mind that the “anonymous” caller needs to brush up on his acting skills. The damage is done, and that’s all that counts, right?

    *smh*

    • Mydejavu

      D.A. I am completely with you, shame on you dumb___ Max Boot….

  • Steve

    What song is played during the breaks on this podcast????

  • Pingback: Submitted by SwamySez: An In-Depth Look At Ron Paul – SwamySez

  • http://profiles.google.com/caleb.b.king X X

    I despise nationalism, patriotism and all that Fascist American Legion malarky. I could aptly be termed a Free Market Anti-Capitalist Mutualist with Socialist tendencies. I believe that the only two legal forms of business should be NPOs and worker-owned cooperatives and that utilities, energy, health, education and the central bank should be nationalized. But I tell you that, despite these convictions, if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination, I will salute the flag with pride and recite the Pledge of Allegiance with my head held high!

    The only hero on the current political scene more worthy of admiration than Ron Paul is Dennis Kucinich, God defend him.  Not surprisingly, the two are friends.  Bernie Sanders and Bryan Dorgan follow behind them.

    Though from opposite sides of the aisle – Libertarian to ultra-Progressive – Paul and Kucinich are incorruptible, Last lions in defense of the common man, human betterment for all peoples, peace and self-determination. Their political differences aside, these compassionate, honest and gravely insightful men both maintain a profound commitment to justice, to transparency to genuine republican representation of the people’s interests.

    If Ron Paul somehow – by fiat of Apollo – is able to defeat the vast media establishment hell-bent on either ignoring or discrediting him, Kucinich would make an ironic but supremely fitting running mate to Dr. Paul.  Perhaps as a testament to the broad coalition of citizens from the Left and the Right who realize we have lost whatever semblance of a government we had to an Oil-hungry, war-mongering, corporate oligopoly squid which controls both parties, the two could emerge victorious.  I know the powers that be would do anything and everything – including, at very last resort, assassination or incapacitation – to keep either of these two from the Oval Office.

    Their lasting bureaucratic legacy: the Department of Peace.

    On behalf of the millions of innocent civilians killed in the Laos-Cambodia-Vietnam War and the millions of innocent civilians slaughtered in the Iraq wars by the United States, may the singular messages of these Cassandras in the desert of tyrannical global capitalist empire be heard!

    As much as it pains me on certain regards to say it:
    Ron Paul 2012!

  • Anonymous

    “5 Reasons Progressives Should Treat Ron Paul with Extreme Caution — ‘Cuddly’ Libertarian Has Some Very Dark Politics”

    http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/152192/5_reasons_progressives_should_treat_ron_paul_with_extreme_caution_–_%27cuddly%27_libertarian_has_some_very_dark_politics?page=1

    • Dave

      Get with the times.

      The Marxist dream is not coming and honest, principled people-powered constitutional government, is the future of reigning in the Wars and the Banks.

      Bottom-up, not China or Soviet-style technocratic or Centralized rule that we must “trust” to be for our own good has lost all legitimacy with the Iraq war and the Financial scandal.

      • Anonymous

        Ron Paul may claim to be “libertarian” at the federal level but at the state level he is an authoritarian and a religious extremist. He would allow the states to criminalize abortion, mandate prayer in schools and require the teaching of evolution. Just to be clear Ron Paul may talk about protecting civil rights but he wants to interfere with a woman’s reproductive rights and allow the states to control her decisions. 

        Libertarians claim to want to promote individual liberty and minimize the role of the state. The majority of libertarians consider a right to abortion as part of their general support for individual rights, especially in regard to what they consider to be a woman’s right to control her body. Paul is in the minority here.

        en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertar…

        Don’t get me wrong I like a few of Paul’s positions (e.g. cutting military) but not others (dismantling Social Security, Medicare, consumer/environmental protections, financial regulation, abortion etc. etc. etc.). Obama’s positions on military spending and civil liberties are actually not that different from Paul’s. Ron Paul is also opposed to campaign finance and lobby reform which is critically important if we are really going to change anything.
        Personally I don’t want to live in a regressive confederate Theocracy. 

        As President Ron Paul would have little or no impact on our military (cf Obama) but he just might be able to push the Supreme Court even further to the right and elect judges willing to strike down a woman’s right to choose and overturn Roe vs Wade (not to mention protect the interests of corporations over individuals). 

        Be careful who you vote for, you might just get them.  
        Ron Paul’s 15 Most Extreme Positions:http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/05/extreme-ron-paul-president-2012 Some reasons why I’m not a Libertarian nor a supporter of Ron Paul:http://www.myspace.com/koyscogitations/blog/30400277810 Reasons Not To Vote For Ron Paul:http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/11/04/10-reasons-not-to-vote-for-paul/16 Ron Paul Quotes:http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/05/16-ron-paul-quotes-that-prove-he-is-not-a-liberal/And perhaps most importantly Ron Paul’s record in Congress:http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html

      • Anonymous

        Ron Paul is NOT a “libertarian!” At the state level he is an authoritarian and a religious extremist who would allow the states to criminalize abortion, mandate prayer in school and require the teaching of creationism. I don’t want to live in a regressive, laissez faire, neo-confederate, Theocracy!

  • John Kosanke
  • Dave
  • Pingback: Christopher Hitchens discusses Ron Paul in 3-2-11 inteview « HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth

  • Anonymous

    ‎”The president has more power over policies that affect our reproductive rights than any other person in government. This unique authority can be used to protect or take away our rights.
    Does it matter who gets appointed to the Supreme Court or to lower federal courts? Do the people the president puts in charge of key health-care programs help or hinder women’s freedom and privacy? Could the president stop bad bills from becoming law by vetoing anti-choice legislation?The answer to all of these questions is yes. That’s why we published The Powers of the President: Reproductive Freedom and Choice. This report takes a look at specific ways the president influences whether we are in charge of our personal, private decisions, from abortion to birth control to many other important issues.”

    http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/elections/2012/gop-presidential-candidates/

    “Rep. Ron Paul has a long anti-choice record from his years in Congress, repeatedly voting to make it more difficult for women to access abortion and birth control.

    During his years in Congress, Rep. Paul voted 106 times on choice-related issues. Ninety-three of those votes were anti-choice. On the occasions he voted pro-choice, Paul often made speeches on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives to explain why and to reaffirm his anti-choice views.
    Rep. Paul tried to zero-out all international family-planning funds.
    In 2009, he voted for the notorious Stupak abortion-coverage ban.
    Rep. Paul voted for ‘personhood’ rights, which could make abortion and many forms of birth control illegal.
    Rep. Paul is vocal about his extreme position on choice:

    ‘I will veto any spending bill that contains funding for Planned Parenthood, facilities that perform abortion and all government family-planning schemes.’” http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/elections/2012/gop-presidential-candidates/ron-paul.html

  • nj
  • Guest

    Ron Paul looks like an alcoholic and will NOT receive my vote based on his politics and behavior. He’s not the only alcoholic and none of them will receive my vote.

  • Anonymous

    The real Ron Paul is now showing his oats.
    He has a lot of support from White Supremacist groups and other extremist groups. People should read some of the garbage this man has written. He endorsed the kind of militia violence that culminated in the Oklahoma city bombing.
    I don’t care what people who support this man say about him changing, but to me once a bigot always a bigot unless proven otherwise.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/us/politics/ron-paul-disowns-extremists-views-but-doesnt-disavow-the-support.htm

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ray-Kirkus/100002630855564 Ray Kirkus

      Obama has a lot of support from Communists? Has he rebuked them? Again he states he didn’t write the stuff and since the rest of his 30 year record is consistent, I am inclined to believe him. Also he treated patients that were on medicare and medicaid for free.. I’m sure if blacks or minorities were turned away, we all would have heard about it by now. Last, libertarians don’t support violence. only for self defence so I really have no clue where you are coming from at all.

  • Fred Oliver

    Ron Paul is obviously an honest man who truly believes in the extreme views he represents. His honesty is not in question. What is in question are the views themselves. He wants to return America to the post-Civil War period when a small group of super-wealthy had all the money and the power and the rest of the population were at their mercy. If we’re going to go back to a previous era, I would much rather go to the 1930′s when the government woke up and realized that the only thing between the average working citizen and econominc slavery was the government. If Ron Paul’s supporters truly looked back at American History prior to the 16th amendment and the social safety net, they might think twice.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jeremy.a.emerson Jeremy Emerson

    “I would much rather go to the 1930′s when the government woke up and realized that the only thing between the average working citizen and econominc slavery was the government”

    HAHA.

ONPOINT
TODAY
Aug 29, 2014
Ukrainian forces guard a checkpoint in the town of Mariupol, eastern Ukraine, Thursday, Aug. 28, 2014. Ukraine's president Petro Poroshenko called an emergency meeting of the nation's security council and canceled a foreign trip Thursday, declaring that "Russian forces have entered Ukraine," as concerns grew about the opening of a new front in the conflict.  (AP)

War moves over Syria, Ukraine. Burger King moves to Canada. Nine-year-olds and Uzis. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

Aug 29, 2014
Beyoncé performs at the 2014 MTV Music Video Awards on Sunday, August 24, 2014 in Inglewood, California. (Getty)

Sex, power and Beyoncé’s feminism. The message to young women.

RECENT
SHOWS
Aug 29, 2014
Beyoncé performs at the 2014 MTV Music Video Awards on Sunday, August 24, 2014 in Inglewood, California. (Getty)

Sex, power and Beyoncé’s feminism. The message to young women.

 
Aug 29, 2014
Ukrainian forces guard a checkpoint in the town of Mariupol, eastern Ukraine, Thursday, Aug. 28, 2014. Ukraine's president Petro Poroshenko called an emergency meeting of the nation's security council and canceled a foreign trip Thursday, declaring that "Russian forces have entered Ukraine," as concerns grew about the opening of a new front in the conflict.  (AP)

War moves over Syria, Ukraine. Burger King moves to Canada. Nine-year-olds and Uzis. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Our Week In The Web: August 29, 2014
Friday, Aug 29, 2014

On hypothetical questions, Beyoncé and the unending flow of social media.

More »
Comment
 
Drew Bledsoe Is Scoring Touchdowns (In The Vineyards)
Thursday, Aug 28, 2014

Football great — and vineyard owner — Drew Bledsoe talks wine, onions and the weird way they intersect sometimes in Walla Walla, Washington.

More »
Comment
 
Poutine Whoppers? Why Burger King Is Bailing Out For Canada
Tuesday, Aug 26, 2014

Why is Burger King buying a Canadian coffee and doughnut chain? (We’ll give you a hint: tax rates).

More »
1 Comment