Dr. Ron Paul: Pulling No Punches
If you can spare a few minutes and listen to the following, you will hear why I am addicted to Ron Paul's message. He doesn't kow-tow to the public. He doesn't change his position (even when it's clear he ought to if he wants that person's vote.)
His consistent mantra of sticking to the Constitution has me sold. His understanding of monetary policy, on what is money, on the Federal Reserve, on a non-interventionist foreign policy, on putting the U.S. back on track economically, on cutting spending, on stopping the government from stealing people's paychecks, then taking that stolen paper and spending it like drunken sailors... Well, he says it better than me:
Dr. Ron Paul is the only candidate who:
- will end the war
- promote peace through trade and communication
- refuses to condone pre-emptive war
- will not regulate the internet
- will eliminate the: IRS, DEA, DHS, DOE, CIA
- will end torture
- will restore habeus corpus
- will reduce the size of the federal government and return power to the states as the Framers intended
- says the federal government should stay out of marriage, out of prayer in schools, out of our bedrooms
- believes in equality for every person
- has the most consistent voting record of any Congressman
- has garnered interest and support from every political spectrum: from Bill Maher to the military (more military personnel votes for Ron Paul than for any other candidate)
The only issue on which he and I differ is abortion rights, an historically polarizing issue.
I am pro-choice; I had an abortion at 27, paid for by Planned Parenthood. Thank goodness I had the option. My life was a trainwreck. Today, at my advanced age and the mother of two boys, gifts of adoption, I would vigorously discourage abortion unless the mother's life is in danger. But I would never vote to make it illegal. No good will ever come of that. The time to battle abortion is pre-conception.
Dr. Paul is pro-life. He will work to overturn Roe vs. Wade and I agree with that plan. The purpose is not to make abortion illegal. The purpose is to take the federal government - and federal funding - out of that decision and give it back to the states.
My husband is pro-life. It is morally repugnant, even to this pro-choice gal, for a government to take a pro-lifer's tax dollar and use it for what that taxpayer believes to be murder.
I believe most states (if not all) will keep abortion legal. Once each of us is prospering again as the result of Dr. Paul's slashing the federal government's reliance on your earnings to pay for their entitlements, we will be able to fund what we choose and afford what we need.
If you accept the Constitution as the backbone of our nation, clearly regulating abortion rights - along with a host of other items the federal government now regulates and thus subsidizes - is not its job. The fed's Constitutional powers are limited, basically, to national defense and roads. The rest is up to the states.
We are headed for bankruptcy due to reckless spending on our interventionist foreign policy and keeping the war machine oiled. Topped off with an unending stream of entitlement and special project funding. Don't even get me started on the Federal Reserve, the "private" bank printing and devaluing our money to their benefit.
Dr. Paul is the ONLY candidate who will work to end the war immediately, bring home our troops from all over the world, take back our power and our rights from the Fed Reserve, stop entitlements. He is the ONLY candidate willing to disrupt the status quo. He's never voted for a tax increase. He gives half his salary back. We could sure use the trillions of dollars saved to strengthen our nation from within.
If you vote for any other candidate, you are voting to continue the slaughter of Iraqi civilians (655,000 and counting) and our U.S. soldiers (almost 4,000 to date) in a conflict over... what? Not 9/11. Not WMDs. What? Profits.
How much more war, how much more shock and awe, how many more civilian and military deaths, how much more destruction, inflation, torture, personal freedom, how much more national security are we willing to sacrifice?
