Tag(s): ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Headline (H3) on 5/24/11:     Permalink
View Article Stats      (5 comments)

Has Ron Paul Gone CO?

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (31 fans)   -- Page 1 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com

Oft-mentioned Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul of Texas says in a published interview that he would refuse to serve his country as a medical officer in the Middle East as he did during the Viet Nam war.

Rep. Paul, a doctor, who served as a flight surgeon during Viet Nam, is quoted in the May Esquire magazine as saying, "I often wonder how many of those people I participated in sending over, and so many helicopters went down. For what? For what? The war was totally lost. Totally fruitless. I wouldn't do that today. I would refuse to do that today."

Rep. Paul's statement does not mean he regarded either war as illegal but that the conflicts were "lost" and "fruitless." Even so, his statements suggest that he would not serve his country if he believed the struggle in question was contrary to his conscience.

The congressman goes on to blast the Patriot Act, the foreign wars of the Bush-Obama administrations, and even wars of the historic past.

" Whether it was the Spanish-American war or World War I or Vietnam, how many millions of people died, how much wealth was consumed?" he asked John Richardson of Esquire. Richardson says that when Paul said the Constitution called for avoiding foreign entanglements, he got a standing ovation from an audience. "It's time to bring the troops home," Paul told them to rousing cheers. (A recent USA Today /Gallup Poll reported 59% of Americans want U.S. troops out of Afghanistan now.)

" The President's not supposed to go to war, or be in charge of taxing and spending," Paul said. "The Founders thought the Congress would always remain the number one of the three branches---that's why it's high on a hill, above the Supreme Court, above the White House," he continued.

Paul believes the U.S. has suffered attacks by foreign terrorists as retaliation for U.S. actions abroad. "They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and free. They come and they attack us because we're over there," he says, adding, "I mean, what would we think if other foreign countries were doing that to us."

Some Republicans don't choose to hear that kind of talk, and have worked to ban him from GOP appearances and debates. Paul retorts, "A substantial portion of the conservative movement has become a parody of its former self."

" Once home to distinguished intellectuals and men of letters, it now tolerates and even encourages anti-intellectualism and jingoism that would have embarrassed earlier generations of conservative thinkers," Paul continues.

An advocate of home rule who takes a libertarian position against Federal involvement, asked the following questions, Esquire noted:

#Will there be no more wars without an actual congressional declaration?

# Will the Federal Reserve Act be repealed?

#Will only gold and silver be called legal tender?

# Will the U.S. end "unconstitutional" departments including Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor?

# Will the Patriot Act be repealed and all the warrantless searches stopped? Paul argues that police officers "are supposed to be local people" but that at the national level today "we have nearly a hundred thousand federal agents now who carry guns---OSHA and EPA and the IRS. They carry guns and they shouldn't."

# Will the TSA be restrained or abolished?

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Sherwood Ross worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News and contributed a regular "Workplace" column for Reuters. He has contributed to national magazines and hosted a talk show on WOL, Washington, D.C. In the Sixties he was active as public (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
5 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Ron Paul's Understanding of the Constitution by Peter Winkler on Wednesday, May 25, 2011 at 12:15:55 PM
you have the Constitution exactly backwards by Speed on Saturday, May 28, 2011 at 11:16:01 AM
Ron Paul - Look again, Ron is the way to go. by Speed on Wednesday, May 25, 2011 at 1:58:46 PM
How in this 21st Century by Michael Dewey on Wednesday, May 25, 2011 at 2:11:51 PM
Paul represents the preservation of the Constitution by madranger on Friday, May 27, 2011 at 8:38:53 PM