I must admit that I am extremely dismayed at the constant fawning over Ron Paul here on a progressive political discussion site. I have always thought that progressives have great difficulty in prioritizing their efforts, and the fact that we are talking about who is the best Republican candidate seems to prove that point.
If half this much effort had been put in here in discussing and supporting Dennis “Could Finish” Kucinich, or trying to draft Al Gore in the New Hampshire primaries, we might actually be making some headway as progressives. Instead, we are floundering in endless and fruitless discussions about whether a libertarian corporatist Republican would put business interests above the interests of citizens. Of course he would, that is the definition of a libertarian Republican. Get the government out of the way so that corporations can do their thing.
After what the Republican Congress and Bush administration have put us through over those fateful six years, for progressives to spend 1 nanosecond discussing the virtues of Ron Paul is ludicrous. Do you really want more corporatist Republicans running our country? Republicans that despise the concept of a public commons and a public good?
I think a little re-ordering of progressive priorities is in order here. If we are talking about Ron Paul, then we are not supporting Dennis Kucinich, John Edwards, or trying to draft Al Gore to run. In other words, we are doing nothing to promote the most progressive candidates on the Democratic side. Priorities? Maybe it's time to think about progressive priorities a little more carefully before it's too late to do something about who the nominee is.
As progressives, our main enemy in this fight has nothing to do with the Republican candidates, it has everything to do with the corporate media and their desperate need to funnel a pro-merger, no-corporate taxes corporatist into the White House. If you don't start pushing hard now for a progressive liberal candidate on the Democratic ticket, you're not going to like the outcome of the 2008 election. And then your stuck for another 4 or 8 years with a regressive America with low wages, no universal healthcare insurance, dilapidated infrastructure, failing education system, and downward spiral in our standard of life.
Progressives…. Prioritize or lose. Focus on the goal, and don’t let the media, or the Republicans, distract you from that goal.
Happy Holidays, and Peace on Earth.
Dr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org, and is a Managing Editor at OpEdNews.com.
What's wrong with you people? Have you lost the ability to think straight? Is there a virus going around attacking progressive brains cells? Have you slept with a Republican lately?
Paul said ''evolution is only a theory''. Just what we need, another religious nut in the White House!
by
francine (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 168 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 6:36:33 AM
first of all francince, you are dead wrong, please do your research before wrongly smearing a candidate and read as follows
official campaign response
south carolina debate question "who here does not believe in evolution- raise your hand."
Subject: Re: Didn’t see his hand Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 16:15:06 -0400 From: Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee To: Ron Shank
Ron,
Ron Paul did not raise his hand during that question, it was Tancredo, Huckabee & Brownback who raised their hands. Dr. Paul is physician and believes in evolution.
so please kindly retract your religious nut comment.
secondly, let me just say no offense, but actions like this column and your subsequent comment are why i left the democratic party and why we are so polarized. everyone like you says oh he's a republican? fuck him! just the same as idiots on the right say oh i hate democrats and i will never support one!! people WE ARE NOT THAT DIFFERENT we all simply misunderstand each other!! it is your poor perception that all republicans are neo con bush's AND THEY ARE NOT, just like the misconception that all democrats are gay loving tax raising welfare touting church burners that would fill schools with transexual teachers. GET A DAMN CLUE PEOPLE. PLEASE. learn to look at things JUST SLIGHTLY outside of your sheltered preconceived notion!
Ron paul is not a corporatist in any way and the fact anyone would say this only proves their incredible ignorance. he has voted against every corrupt piece of the republican agenda even railing against the federal reserve, THE ULTIMATE FORM OF CORPORATISM. he takes zero corporate money as well (UNLIKE NANCY PELOSI WHO TAKES MONEY FROM SUNOCO- LOOK IT UP)
if you would actually research this man and his record you'd learn why "progressives" are leaving the Democratic party in droves to support him.
by
jeremy xx (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 23 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 12:44:08 PM
pelosi is funded by occidental petroleum, not sunoco. and according to wikipedia:
Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst have identified Occidental Petroleum as the 47th-largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States, with roughly 1.2 million pounds of toxic chemicals released annually into the air.
also look up their involvement in a helicopter bombing in colombia for business interests killing innocent colombians. it's awesome. glad to see such upstanding corporations are funding our leaders!!
by
jeremy xx (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 23 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 1:09:16 PM
Ron Paul has consistently spoken against the rise of corporatism. But the mainstream dems (sorry Dennis K, but the machine will NOT allow you to be the dem candidate) are all corporate bought and sold. The very thing this article argues why we should not look at Paul, are the very things you will end up electing with someone like Hillary.
Excellent post, good job on spotting the error on evolution. I have not heard Paul say ONE thing about religion. As a libertarian, the last thing he wants is the government involved in religion or promoting religion.
by
Anthony Wade (134 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 433 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 2:04:49 PM
Here's What I'm Dismayed With - Progressives Who Worship Pol
Here's What I'm Dismayed With - Progressives Who Worship Political Parties over rightness and truth!
Your devotion to Democrats, to a party that has betrayed truth, justice, and compassion for their corporate masters is disturbing at the highest order.
I have worked in refugee camps where innocent children had escaped mass murder from thugs supported, supplied and trained by the CIA and US militarist policy.
We have seen starvation and slave labor worldwide made possible by a corrupt corporatist CIA led policy of murder of good leaders, and throning corporate prostitutes we call Prime Ministers or Presidents so they seem legitimate after our CIA destroyed their democracy and replaced it with painted whores.
We've seen the American national coffers diverted to mostly militarism. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. warned a nation that year after year spends more on military than social uplift, is approaching spiritual death.
These Democrats you worship, have participated in the growing spiritual death of our nation. Bill Clinton is a case in point.
I've sweated and slaved to get these Democrats elected. I've given my life to it as a low paid professional staffer and a full time volunteer. I've been betrayed over and over again.
The "left / right paradigm" the corporate media feeds you is a lie. A Hollywood show, like all star wrestling to make you think you have a choice.
NO CANDIDATE HAS CHALLENGED THE CIA GLOBAL EMPIRE OR THE MILITARIZATION AND CREEPING FASCISM AMERICA IS EMBRACING LIKE RON PAUL HAS. (Except Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney). No Democrat has, that's a fact. Kucinich was best and the Iowa Democrats simply deleted him from the race.
The Democratic Party is not your savior. The Republicans are your destroyer. It is time to stop settling for the "evil of two lessers."
Ron Paul is a sage, and true patriot, who wants a foriegn policy that will end the CIA's filthy disgusting crimes worldwide. The savings for American tax payers will be more than we will ever see from the modest tepid changes Hillary Obama promise.
Ron Paul will NOT leave some troops in Iraq as both Obama and Hillary have already promised to do. Stop worshipping a political party and stand up for what is right.
Anyone who is a true progressive hates the international crimes perpetrated year after year around the world in our name. Any true liberal hates the militarization and creeping fascism America is seeing.
Only one candidate is challenging this with soul force. The $18 million Ron Paul raised in the 4th quarter, breaking all fundraising records without lifting a finger, is because "some" Americans do care about truth and peace. Not just their petty little "Democratic talking points."
No one has been a more dedicated Democrat than me, and I say I've had enough!
Join the Ron Paul Revolution!! Let's get this country back from the corporations and militarists!!
by
Bill Douglas (68 articles, 2 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 434 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 4:11:25 PM
"Here's What I'm Dismayed With - Progressives Who Worship Political Parties over rightness and truth!"
Of course, anyone who "worships political parties" is not really a progressive are they?
I get the thrill that Paul gives to people who havn't had anyone to speak for them in the Republican Party. It is the same thrill I get when I hear Kucinich. (But not Edwards, as I see him as a liberal populist, not a progressive.)
I admire Paul and his sticking to his principles, and I do think he is the least objectionable Republican candidate, At least like Kucinich he has a Constitutional analysis when most don't (Dodd hit the nail on head with the Retroactive Telecome Immunity issue, but he has a hit and miss analysis), but I'm not going to join Paul or his candidacy because I just don't agree with his Constitutional analysis. I think Paul and the libertarianism that he speaks for has denied the fundamental social purpose of the Constitution as expressed in its preamble and structure that by taking the position that government should be so minimized as they do, they actually attempt to annul the Constitutional purpose of promoting the General Welfare. Thus they are advocating a form of Constitutionalism that violates the Constitution, IMHO.
by
Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments)
on Wednesday, December 26, 2007 at 3:53:04 PM
Science says that all explanations are "only a theory," and if a better explanatory theory comes along it is the duty of scientists to analyze and adopt it in addition too or instead of evolution So the quote from Paul that you provide is both accurate and scientific. If you have a quote of Paul that supports your allegation that he idenies the current scientific validity of the theory of evolution, then please post that quote so we can have something real to discuss.,
by
Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments)
on Wednesday, December 26, 2007 at 3:37:18 PM
Every candidate, on both sides of the aisle, is a Corporatist. Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate who is not a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. How can any candidate claiming to be a progressive, and "against" corporate control of our government, be a member of the group once presided over by Dick Cheney? The left/right democrat/republican paradigm is ridiculous. You have to wake up. Ron Paul's interview Sunday on Meet the Press was a stunning event. He's the only one who is railing (RAILING) against corporate control. That's why he is getting play from contributers to OpEd. Who else in this race has the courage to talk about facism? He said it was rightly called Corporatism, Big Business in bed with Big Government.
by
Lydia Compton (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 7:25:45 AM
There are different kinds of corporatism. Ron Paul is the most strongly opposed to the kind of government-aided corporatism we now have. But libertarianism would wind up handing over power to large corporations. I know libertarians don't see it that way, but I'm convinced that is the case. So I consider libertarianism to be a form of corporatism, while acknowledging that libertarians are among the strongest opponents of existing corporatism.
The major party candidates with any legitimate claim to be opposed to corporatism are Kucinich, Gravel and Huckabee (I know it seems a bit strange to have him classed with Kucinich and Gravel, but he has drawn more ire from corporatist interests than any other candidate - the only candidate targeted by the "Club for Growth" which Huckabee rightly calls the "Club for Greed" - and has the strongest anti-corporate rhetoric). Edwards talks anti-corporate, but it is not believable when you look at his record, his financial supporters and his lifestyle.
by
Bill Samuel (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 181 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 2:26:25 PM
that just makes no sense whatsoever, and the proof is 2 reasons-
number 1 is kucinich endorsed him as a possible vp! kucinich would choose a corporatist as his vp?! are you kidding?!
secondly look at where the corporate money and election influence is going? one hint- it's not going to ron paul, they haven't sent a single dollar to him and are actively funding his opponents! why would they fund people running against the man that would somehow empower the corporate machine?
i would be curious to hear your take on this.
by
jeremy xx (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 23 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 3:24:40 PM
UNRESTRAINED COMPETITION INEVITABLY LEADS TO MONOPLY
Libertarianism would remove all government controls on corporations since they consider such controls a restraint of trade and interference with free competion. Libertarians consider antitrust laws a restraint of trade and interference with free competition.
With corporations free to compete free of antitrust restraints in a survival of the fitest battle, only one, or at most a few corporatons would survive. The survivors would find it most profitable to institute a monoply. The paradox of free market capitalism is that it would lead to monoply and the end of the free market. The few surviving corporations would dominate the government more than the many competing corporations do now.
Hence the statement that Ron Paul's program would leat to even more corporate control.
So the Walmartization of America is not happening because Li
So the Walmartization of America is not happening because Libertarians haven't been elected President???
Give us all a break, you insult our intelligence. Our country is a fascist state, meaning the our government has become corporate.
Who has had the courage to say that?? ONLY RON PAUL
Yet you tell these horror stories to get people to vote for morally bankrupt Democratic corporate shills instead of the only man with the courage to say the truth. America is becoming fascist.
Yes, RON PAUL said that on national corporate TV. No Democrat has the courage to say that. Not one!
by
Bill Douglas (68 articles, 2 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 434 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 4:22:27 PM
No anything can exist without force, so what's your point?
Nothing and no system of economic relationships can exist without governmental force. Just as the physical laws of thermodynamics are required for all existing things there are also social laws of economicdynamics for markets and other socially existing things. So what is the point about monopoly, since along with everything else, it too as well as it's prevention is dependent on force?
The core of all political debate is all about who will weild the force and for what purposes?
Libertarian analysis imagines a world without force through the fallacy of thinking that small government would mean and result in small force. That equation of the smallest government with the greatest liberty is libertarianism's greatest flaw.
Liberty is not in and of itself the greatest good. The greatest liberty is not that liberty with the least social conscience or that subject to the least social forces.
All things in balance applies to Liberty as well. The best liberty is a balanced liberty, not an unrestrained liberty or a liberty without social and governmental forces existing to regulate it.
by
Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments)
on Wednesday, December 26, 2007 at 4:10:50 PM
That's naive Bill - Right now corporations own this country
Why does all the money pour into Washington from lobbyists? Because this government is for sale.
What is the largest welfare payout? Corporate welfare. Ron Paul will try to end that. Democrats will "massage it."
Say there was a Libertarian America, just for the sake of argument. Does that mean there is no legislative branch anymore? No. If a company pollutes and that pollution hurts someone, that company can be sued.
These hysterical statements, and the delusion that the current system actually is protecting us, is naivity at its worst.
People are dying worldwide because the CIA is destabilizing their countries. Ron Paul would end that. But the so called "liberals" on this list who attack him, could care less about this global suffering.
The just worship the Democratic Party. Its disgusting.
by
Bill Douglas (68 articles, 2 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 434 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 4:19:21 PM
please explain how you plan to get by the rigged E-voting machines? All this Hoorah for Paul means nothing if you don't fix the election fraud first. And I don't care who the choices are, the one that will be POTUS will be whomever that powers that be want in if you don't first have an honest election system.
Tell me how you plan to fix the system and I'll get excited about this election - until then this is nothing. It's not even interesting. It's a Dog and Pony Show with no dog, no pony and little to show.
by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 1024 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 3:22:50 PM
Al Gore and John Kerry "THREW" their elections. FACT!
I worked my a*s off for both Gore and Kerry. Then when it was obvious the elections had been stolen . . . they conceeded. We now know the both Gore and Kerry won. On election days they knew that legally registered voters had been denied their votes in Florida, Ohio, etc.
Did they fight for us? For our democracy? NO, they gave up on us.
Ron Paul is on national TV taking on the CIA corporate globalist behemouth. If he has the courage to do what no Democrat has the courage to do . . . then he will have the courage to fight for votes.
How so called "progressives" can be so blind to a Democratic Skull and Bones party that has served up our democracy on a silver plate to the GOP thugs . . . is enough to make me want to serve up my lunch on my computer screen.
Join the Ron Paul Revolution! Our democracy depends on it.
by
Bill Douglas (68 articles, 2 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 434 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 4:27:58 PM
Wall Street Journal wrote on Dec 21, that the two major corporate parties are blaming each other for both of them not seating any Federal Election Commissioners, thus presently, we do not have a FEC. This is going under the radar, and very important to those who fear fraud. Now the Federal Elections Commission says one must be in the race to contest an election, so maybe not having a FEC will give some attorney, or Nader, the opportunity to contest an election, and "Don't Taz me bro" but Kerry and Gore BOTH threw their elections. Ron Paul is offering us an opportunity to take the Republic from the neocon/libs and remake it. Let's go for it. Go Ron Paul! And please know, over on the many Ron Paul bloggs, election fraud is a hot hot topic, along with many conspiracy theories and facts. It's the most facinating political terra in my lifetime. YouTube Ron Paul
by
Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 304 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 10:12:07 PM
but please explain to me how you're going to over-come the election fraud? Just how are you fighting it? Will there be poll watchers at every poll? Exit polls? High powered attorneys ready to file legal proceedings immediately in case of suspected fraud? Are there plans to stop E-voting machines and have paper ballot public counting? Is there a effort to purge all the State Attorneys rove placed all over the country? Because if you're not doing this and more I wouldn't be chilling any champagne just yet.
We're talking over 30 years of systematic destruction of our election process and perfected over the last 7yrs., and if you have a plan as to how you're going to overcome it before the 08' election I would like to know. Otherwise ... I don't care how many you'll have is this "revolution", you aren't going anywhere.
by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 1024 comments)
on Wednesday, December 26, 2007 at 2:15:45 AM
Please Google "Ron Paul election fraud". That will link you up to several organizations that have been formed and working on this issue right now. The rEVOLution shares your concern and others far more on top of this than me have formed organizations. Check it out. If you are not impressed, maybe you could help to make it better?
by
Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 304 comments)
on Wednesday, December 26, 2007 at 9:40:56 AM
If you want Bigger Federal Government then vote for any body on the ballot except for Dr. Ron Paul. Ron Paul is for a Limited Federal Government as the Constitution Mandates. Ron Paul wants to give the Power back to People and the States as well as Local Levels. If you are too Blind to see how enormous our Federal Government is well then I don't know what to say. It has gotten out of hand and out of control and not only will Dr. Ron Paul restore the Federal Government back to the norms as the Constitution states, he is restoring the People's faith back into the Government, Look at the voter turn out of previous elections. We will all see a huge surge in voter turn out come 2008 and it is that reason why you will see Dr. Ron Paul win the nomination and then the General Election. The #1 Priority of our Federal Government is to serve and to Protect our American People. If we are unable to secure our borders at home what makes us think we can protect the American People from abroad. Having our Troops brought back home will Tremendously help Protect our Borders. Ron Paul simply wants to give the Power back to the People the way the Constitution intended it to be...Is that so bad or do you all prefer to be 100% dependent on the Big Government...let it continue to grow, spend, borrow money that isn't here or there, etc... Oh, by the way, by having a Limited Government also means most of the lobbyists and special interest groups go away...is that really so bad? Think about it and Plz regardless who you vote for Do your own Homework, whatever you do don't allow the mainstream media to do your homework for you and do NOT allow them to tell YOU who to Vote For. Merry Chrismas Everybody.
by
countryboypride77 (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 7:35:05 AM
to find the government hiding there? This oh so typical right wing rant is both disturbing and false. You use governmental services daily, and give it no thought, yet, when some of those services go to deserving causes that isnt you you foam and rant about how big our government is and how deep in your pocket as well.
We, each and every one of us, has a duty to this nation and to our fellow citizens. This is the very heart of the progressive, no dammit, the Liberal agenda. If there is incompetence in our government then it is because we the voters have elected the wrong people to run that government.
This is so elementary and your right wing kool aid , including support of a man , Paul, who would further free the corporations from restraint, who would further allow our education system to deteriorate, who would abandon those who need our help the most, simply supports the CHeney agenda and further diminishes our nation.
The greatness of a nation is judged, not by how the wealthiest live, but by how the neediest are cared for.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 8:15:46 AM
