While I like what Ron Paul symbolizes in the Repub...
While I like what Ron Paul symbolizes in the Republican primary – namely, the awakening of a segment of the Republican party that its positions as represented by its mainstream candidates are anti-freedom, pro-torture, and generally unethical – this list of bills that he sponsored, co-sponsored, or supported in Congress disabuses me of any notion of ever supporting him in the general election. I don’t disagree with every bill on the list, but the sum gives me a general idea of where Paul’s priorities lie. (via andrew sullivan)
Comments (8)
Re: the flag burning bills: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/12/paul/index.html
Most of the listed stuff is libertarian party line (less protection of civil rights in private employment matters, less regulation of corporate behavior, less regulation of guns, lower taxes), some of it is his own personal beliefs unrelated to libertarian viewpoints (abortion, the gold standard, dismantling the federal reserve) and some of it seems mildly anti-libertarian (against flag burning?). Mostly, though, it's fairly standard libertarian dogma.
I don't agree with the characterization that not automatically granting citizenship to anyone born within the territorial borders of the nation "guts" the 14th amendment.
UPDATE: I just read the flag burning article... ok, it looks like it's almost all libertarian or personal belief structures. Anybody who thinks that a democrat or a green party supporter is going to like libertarian values is fooling themselves. The pull for Paul should not be across party lines, it should be from libertarians (who mostly self-identify within the Republican party but can be found anywhere). He generally won't do well (though he's moved into fourth place in New Hampshire).
Bloomberg on the other hand, is going to be a lot of fun.
Yes, I guess this is mostly relevant for those who support Paul across party lines. This group is not non-existent -- I saw a college-aged self-indentifying liberal on TV the other day saying she supported Paul. Since when do liberals want to get rid of OSHA? I love OSHA! (Or at least what it represents -- I'm very much for corporate safety regulations, and hence am not an economic libertarian.)
By the way, I'm a big fan of sarcastically introducing amendments to the Constitution.
"Yeah, I propose an amendment to the Constitution banning flag burning... I'm TOTALLY in favor of this amendment."
"I don't agree with the characterization that not automatically granting citizenship to anyone born within the territorial borders of the nation "guts" the 14th amendment."
Can you explain why you think this, DoorFrame? The Fourteenth Amendment outright says you get citizenship if you're born here.
Fair enough, it does say that (though I had to go back and check, I actually didn't remember this point... I'm a GOOD student). I assumed the argument was that changing the citizenship rules would essentially create an unprotected underclass that society could discriminate against with impunity. Since that's not the argument, I withdraw my comment.
I need a research assistant.
Doing some research on flag burning, I came a cross a Richard Cohen op-ed piece where he claims that 70 percent of the U.S. public is in favor of a law prohibiting flag burning. I was shocked. I consider myself to be pretty middle of the road politically, yet have always opposed such a law, even successfully winning a debate on this issue in the 7th grade.
For the record, I would be happy to make that argument. In fact, someone in the Hartford Courant sorta just did. (I've been getting the full Simsbury/Manchester/Middletown tourist experience.)