What concerns me about Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is not the man people pretend he is. I've had it with all the worship of a man who has a long trail of issues people tend to brush off.
Ron Paul is not the man people pretend he is. I've had it with all the worship of a man who has a long trail of issues people tend to brush off.
On the one hand, Texas congressman Ron Paul, Republican candidate for the presidency, is a zealous champion of limited government, free markets and low taxes. On the other hand, he reportedly thinks the U.S. should not have gone to war against Nazi Germany. What to make of this heresy? In a word, a great deal – for it may define Mr. Paul’s isolationism.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/neil-reynolds/the-dangerous-isolationism-of-ron-paul/article2302229/
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has been spending large amounts on airfare as a congressman, flying first class on dozens of taxpayer-funded flights to his home state. The practice conflicts with the image that Paul portrays as the only presidential candidate serious about cutting federal spending.
Paul flew first class on at least 31 round-trip flights and 12 one-way flights since May 2009 when he was traveling between Washington and his district in Texas, according to a review by The Associated Press of his congressional office expenses. Four other round-trip tickets and two other one-way tickets purchased during the period were eligible for upgrades to first-class after they were bought, but those upgrades would not be documented in the expense records.
Paul, whose distrust of big government is the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, trusts the more expensive government rate for Continental Airlines when buying his tickets. Paul chose not to buy the cheaper economy tickets at a fraction of the price because they aren’t refundable or as flexible for scheduling, his congressional staff said.
“We always get him full refundable tickets since the congressional schedule sometimes changes quickly,” said Jeff Deist, Paul’s chief of staff. Paul might have to pay out of his own pocket for canceled flights in some cases if he didn’t buy refundable tickets, Deist said.
But records show that most of the flights for Paul were purchased well in advance and few schedule changes were necessary. Nearly two-thirds of the 49 tickets were purchased at least two weeks in advance, and 42 percent were bought at least three weeks in advance, the AP’s review found.
Paul charged taxpayers nearly $52,000 on the more expensive tickets, or $27,621 more than the average Continental airfare for the flights between Washington and Houston, according to the AP’s review of his congressional expenses and average airfares compiled by the Department of Transportation.
The more expensive tickets have other benefits as well, including allowing Paul to upgrade to first class when his staff reserves a flight because his frequent government travel gives him membership in an elite class of Continental customers who earn travel perks. Upgrades to first-class with cheaper fares are possible, at times limited to available seats days before the flight. But those upgrades are not guaranteed and some require ticket changes at the airport, according to the airline’s frequent flyer rules.
The AP reviewed congressional travel before the Iowa caucuses for the two members of Congress running at the time – Paul and Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Bachmann later ended her presidential campaign.
House records show Bachmann, like most other congressional members, also paid the more expensive government rate for airfare. But her staff would not provide access to more detailed expense records that show when and what type of tickets were purchased.
Paul’s congressional staff provided access to all expense records requested.
Congressional members don’t have to pay the government rate for travel, but most do, including many like Paul and Bachmann who advocate cuts in federal spending.
“You could almost always beat the government rate,” said Steve Ellis, vice president of the Washington-based Taxpayers for Common Sense, a federal budget watchdog group. “They need to be walking the walk, and one of the ways they can do that is to be fiscally responsible for how they spend their member office money.”
Jesse Benton, Paul’s campaign manager, didn’t respond to a written request to explain how Paul’s use of more expensive airfare, which allows him to fly first class, corresponds with his commitment to cut federal spending. Instead, he sent a statement that started, “No one is more committed to cutting spending than Dr. Paul.”
But Paul’s congressional travel conflicts with claims in campaign appearances that he’s the most frugal and serious deficit hawk in the race.
“The talk you hear in Washington is pure talk, because there is nobody suggesting, the other candidates are not talking about real cuts,” Paul said in a speech to supporters last week after his second-place finish in New Hampshire.
He has proposed cutting $1 trillion from the federal budget during his first year as president, and has confronted other candidates in public forums as “big government conservatives.”
“You’re a big spender, that’s all there is to it,” Paul told former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania during a GOP debate in New Hampshire.
Paul boasts on his website about declining other congressional perks, such as a pension and all-expense-paid travel “junkets” that other lawmakers take. And he says he regularly returns money from his congressional account to the treasury.
But when it comes to his congressional travel, Paul has opted not to search for cheaper airfares that could mean returning more of his office account to the treasury, which uses any money returned by House or Senate members to help reduce the federal deficit.
Paul paid $51,972 for his government-rate flights between Washington and Houston between May 2009 and March 2011, or more than twice the $24,351 average airfare on Continental for travel between Washington and Houston. The average airfare figure represents the price for all tickets purchased for Continental flights between Washington and Houston, including economy and first-class travel, according to the Transportation Department’s Domestic Airline Fares Consumer Report, which collects airfare information for the nation’s busiest travel routes.
Paul’s staff regularly booked him in first class on flights when tickets were purchased, according to expense records. His office paid between $1,217 and $1,311 for each round-trip flight, compared to the average airfare for that trip ranging from $528 to $760, according to the airline fares consumer report.
The period reviewed by the AP was the most recent period for which complete congressional expense records were available.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/16/ron-paul-defends-first-cl_n_1208495.html
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” — Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, meet Ronald Ernest Paul. He is the very soul of a foolish consistency. Meaning that he is willing, often to a fault, to follow his ideology to its logical and most extreme conclusions.
But in Paul’s take on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he doubles down on the bad premise instead.
Paul has long argued — and reiterated recently on CNN — that the act, which liberated untold millions of African-Americans from the tyranny of Jim Crow, “destroyed the principle of private property and private choices.” In other words, forcing a restaurant to take down a Whites Only sign infringed the rights of the restaurant’s owner. A similar argument was made by segregationists in 1964 — and by slave owners in the 1850s.
Maybe it’s easy to make freedom an issue of “property rights” when you have never been the property.
That said, it is of little importance to wonder, as some are now doing, whether all of this makes Ron Paul a racist. Yes, we’ve recently learned of a newsletter sent out under his name in the 1990s that included racist language. Yes, Paul has won — and declined to disavow — the support of various white supremacist groups.
But yes, too, Paul has decried the War on Drugs as a war on African-American men— a view shared by many on the right. Then ask yourself what sort of nation this would be if that view ever prevailed.
Can government be overlarge, overbearing, overwhelming, over restrictive, over intru-sive? Of course. And where it is those things, it is the right — and duty — of the electorate to pare it back.
On the other hand, unless you enjoy salmonella in your food and lead in your paint, unless you think it’s OK that your doctor has no medical degree and your lawyer no license, unless you’re fine with breathing sooty air and drinking tainted water and unless you really think a black woman in Mississippi, locked out of public places by threat of violence and force of law, should have been required to wait on market forces to rescue her, you must regard Paul’s moral imbecility with a certain appalled awe.
Heaven help us if the intellectual rigidity he symbolizes is really the only alternative to the intellectual malleability of so many of his colleagues.
At its best, government vindicates and defends a people’s noblest ideals. The Civil Rights Act was government at its best. Paul disputes this and styles himself a defender of freedom for so doing. Too bad he can’t spend a day being black in Mississippi in 1964. He might emerge with a better understanding of that word.
As it is, Paul’s extremism only proves this much: Emerson didn’t know the half of it.
DES MOINES — New Hampshire’s most influential newspaper says Ron Paul is a “dangerous man.”
Union Leader publisher Joe McQuaid wrote:
His defenders say they admire Ron Paul’s consistency. It is true, Paul has been consistently spouting this nonsense. It is about time New Hampshire voters showed him the door.
Jesse Benton, Ron Paul’s national campaign chairman, pushed back in an e-mail earlier today that suggests the Texas congressman is going to stay his course.
“It’s never going to happen. Ron Paul is not going to be the nominee,” she said.
More: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/12/ron-paul-union-leader-dangerous-man-/1?csp=34news
“I used to vote for the Libertarian Party nominee in presidential elections, but in 1988, I didn’t. Why? Because Ron Paul was the nominee, and he had shown a disturbing habit of disseminating repulsive bigotry. Paul eventually stopped doing so, saying he never read the newsletters that contained the offending material and didn’t agree with them. If you believe that, I’ve got a stash of gold in Fort Knox to sell you. Paul doesn’t like being asked about the issue, which is why he abruptly walked out of an interview on CNN.But he keeps being asked because he hasn’t given full or convincing answers.
Why would he put out publications under his name without the slightest idea what was in them? And if he didn’t write the stuff, why hasn’t he identified the author and revealed his name? If Paul wants to put the issue to rest, he’ll have to confront those matters honestly.
Paul insists such sentiments are totally alien to him. I wish. He’s made a habit over the years of appealing to paranoid conspiracy-mongers, like those at the John Birch Society, and his anti-Israel views have occasionally verged on anti-Semitic. Libertarians are often written off as nuts merely for taking rational views that are unconventional. Paul, however, has given critics ample grounds to think he’s a wack job.
If he doesn’t share the views expressed in his newsletters, he has certainly indulged associates who do. And that’s reason enough to vote for someone else.”
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-12-22/news/chi-ron-pauls-racist-newsletters-20111222_1_ron-paul-newsletters-libertarian-party-nominee
“I’ve made the observation before, that Ron Paul, really doesn’t view his job in Congress as one of governing. To him his job there is more about waxing philosophical, making ideological speeches and voting no, so he can then write books, give lectures and the like, about his supposed ideology. Ron Paul isn’t in D.C. to help govern. He’s just there to lecture.
We’ve seen Ron Paul’s double talk on a few things already. He wrote a bill for term-limits, but then served 11+ terms. He rants against earmarks but puts them in the bills. All examples of his waxing philosophical, without really governing.
Here is another example of Ron Paul double talking and waxing philosophical, without actually governing. He’s giving a little speech on abortion. He says he has some legislation in Congress about defining when life would begin. He says it’s been ignored by the pro-life community. But then he turns around and says he wouldn’t support it as president? HUH???
Around 45 seconds in he talks about this bill he has in Congress, but he wouldn’t promote it as president.
http://ronpaulexposed.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/ron-pauls-double-talk-on-abortion/
Sounds like more double talk from Ron Paul to me. Sounds like more from a man who isn’t there to govern, but rather is there to wax philosophical as everyone else does the heavy lifting.
In recent days troubling passages of Ron Paul’s newsletters have surfaced. The New Republic lists a few dozen of the most inflammatory passages including many racist and homophobic statements. Here is a sampling:
“A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” analyzes the Los Angeles riots of 1992: “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. … What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided.”
The November 1990 issue of the Political Report had kind words for David Duke.
An October 1990 edition of the Political Report ridicules black activists, led by Al Sharpton, for demonstrating at the Statue of Liberty in favor of renaming New York City after Martin Luther King. The newsletter suggests that “Welfaria,” “Zooville,” “Rapetown,” “Dirtburg,”and “Lazyopolis ” would be better alternatives—and says, “Next time, hold that demonstration at a food stamp bureau or a crack house.”
The September 1994 issue of the Ron Paul Survival Report states that “those who don’t commit sodomy, who don’t get blood a transfusion, and who don’t swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay.”
The June 1990 issue of the Political Report says: “I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.”
http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-philadelphia/ron-paul-bigot