Rep. Ron Paul, (R. Texas)--someone even a liberal could love
 

I had never heard of this guy until he appeared on NOW, with Bill Moyers Friday last. I found myself agreeing with most of what he said. Among the highlights:

1. He voted against the Iraq war, on the grounds that there was no reasonable intelligence that suggested Iraq was a real threat to the U.S.

2. He opposes nation building, especially bringing democracy to distant lands, primarily because it never works.

3. He thinks most of our expenditures in foreign countries is a waste. He thinks we should bring that money back home, throw half of it at reducing the debt, and use the other half for proven social programs that actually further the interests of the country.

4. He was stunned by the lack of debate on the Iraq War resolution.

5. He argues that Iraq is a contrived country, that it will probably never work as a single entity (except under the control of a strongman dictator). He thinks we should divide it into its disparate parts, and leave as soon as possible.

It's a pity that most of the loyal opposition Democrats were not as bold.

Anyone else know anything about this guy? A clue might be that he was scheduled to address the Libertarian Party convention.

Why are so many Libertarians on this board so committed to the Iraq war?

Joe B.

Damn! Are you sure this guy isn't someone you made up?

He's one of the premire libertarians in the country. He represents a district adjacent to the one I live. Thats why the opinions of some of the people who call themselves "libertarians" on this forum amaze me. Are you sure about the (R) designation? He was identifying himself as a libertarian last I heard.

Re: Rep. Ron Paul, (R. Texas)--someone even a liberal could love
 

Now, Joe, you wouldn't be suggesting that they are hiding behind this Libertarian label for some reason?

Posted by KirkVining: Are you sure about the (R) designation? He was identifying himself as a libertarian last I heard.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Moyers identified him as "an independent Republican," and the graphic on the screen said "R-Texas."

Joe B.

Posted by KirkVining: Now, Joe, you wouldn't be suggesting that they are hiding behind this Libertarian label for some reason?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Fraid so. Libertarianism creates the image of the rugged individualist who has risen above the pettiness of partisan, Dem/Repo politics. I suspect that most of the "Libertarians" on this board have voted and always will vote for the most right-wing Republicans available, world without end, amen.

Joe B.

Never a post that fails to slam someone's own beliefs or actions that differ from his own.

sad..... very sad.

I guess I am at a loss to find where anyone's beliefs were slammed in this thread. Seems like a thread that noted there is a Libertarian view that has been articulated by a Republican from Texas that was given a favorable review.

Then, it was also noted that it seems some people pin a Libertarian label on themselves, when they seem to set aside Libertarian priorities whenever they conflict with right-wing, or really any activities promoted by the present Republican administration. I fail to see how it cold be considered slamming someone's beliefs when it is pointed out that it appears what is going on is certain individuals are stepping off the Republican label and adopting the Libertarian label, then, from the new Libertarian podium, promoting the Republican President's positions, as if that lends some new and greater credence to them.

This is getting a little confusing. Jim

I think Paul switched his label so he could get committe charmanships. Label-switching seems somewhat self serving no matter how its practiced. Gee, you know next time Kerry says something stupid, I'm going to be a "Green".

From libertarian.org:

What is 'Libertarian'
How much liberty is good for the individual?
How much government do we need?

The libertarian, or "classical liberal," perspective is that individual well-being, prosperity, and social harmony are fostered by "as much liberty as possible" and "as little government as necessary."

These are open-ended answers that leave a lot to explore: What's possible? What's necessary? What are the practical implications? the unsolved problems?

According to Funk and Wagnall's Dictionary
lib-er-tar-i-an, n. 1. a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct.... advocating liberty or conforming to principles of liberty.

According to American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
NOUN: 1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

The Challenge of Democracy (6th edition), by Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey Berry, and Jerry Goldman

Liberals favor government action to promote equality, whereas conservatives favor government action to promote order. Libertarians favor freedom and oppose government action to promote either equality or order.

According to Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2000 © 1997-2000 Microsoft Corporation
Libertarianism, political philosophy emphasizing the rights of the individual. The doctrine of libertarianism stresses the right to self-ownership and, by extension, the right to private ownership of material resources and property. Advocates oppose any form of taxation and favor a laissez-faire economic system.

According to Libertarian.org
While libertarians are a diverse group of people with many philosophical starting points, they share a defining belief: that everyone should be free to do as they choose, so long as they don't infringe upon the equal freedom of others.

According to David Boaz, Libertarianism: A Primer, Free Press, 1997
Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud.

According to Charles Murray, What It Means to Be a Libertarian, Broadway Books, 1997
The American Founders created a society based on the belief that human happiness is intimately connected with personal freedom and responsibility. The twin pillars of the system they created were limits on the power of the central government and protection of individual rights. . . .

A few people, of whom I am one, think that the Founders' insights are as true today as they were two centuries ago. We believe that human happiness requires freedom and that freedom requires limited government.

The correct word for my view of the world is liberal. "Liberal" is the simplest anglicization of the Latin liber, and freedom is what classical liberalism is all about. The writers of the nineteenth century who expounded on this view were called liberals. In Continental Europe they still are. . . . But words mean what people think they mean, and in the United States the unmodified term liberal now refers to the politics of an expansive government and the welfare state. The contemporary alternative is libertarian. . . .

Libertarianism is a vision of how people should be able to live their lives-as individuals, striving to realize the best they have within them; together, cooperating for the common good without compulsion. It is a vision of how people may endow their lives with meaning-living according to their deepest beliefs and taking responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
***************************
Haven't heard much that here. What I hear is pro-government security state, anti-gay BS masquerading as it. I think the position on the Padilla case of some might have been especially hypocritical if this is what they claim to believe.

The point is despite what Ron Paul calls himself I totally agreed with what I consider to be his truthful and well reasoned position on our involvment in Iraq. To me it is remarkable that someone in the US Congress actually holds and expresses such views. How un-American of him.

Ron Paul is probably the only truly honest guy in Congress, which is why he'll never get anything done, unfortunately. Still, it's good that someone at least gets his level of questions/comments into the Congressional Record, so the other schlubs can't say that the subject never came up. He's best known as the only one who asks Greenspan really tough questions when he comes to the Hill; Paul's on record as wanting to do away with the Fed, and points out that the Constitution specifies that only gold and silver can be designated as currency under the constitution.

Most people think he's a little wacked out, but I really like the guy. Congratulations to Kirk's neighbors for having the stones to keep electing him.

He represents the original Austin Grant area of Texas, which is the area south of Houston that was first settled in Texas by Americans in the early 1800's. That area, between Corpus and San Antonio has always been known for its dislike of a powerful federal government. The area is real cowboy ranch country, and "rugged individualism" is a fact of life for many. The odd part about the area compared to the rest of Texas is the great number of Anglo Roman Catholics, and of course the Mexican descendent Roman Catholics compared to the rest of protestant fundie Texas, that make up the middle class. These people seem to be not under the heavy influence of the Tom Delay Republican Aytollah movement which dominates Republican politics in Texas, so even tho they share much of the Republican anti- fed agenda, they recoil at the replacement of Democrat big government spenders with Republican big government spenders, and at the Republican foriegn policy adventurists, and at the denial of rights agenda of the fundies.

Rep. Ron Paul is one of my all time favorite Congressman. I vehemently disagree with his economic philosophy and policies, but I REALLY appreciate his commitment to principled independence in a sea of poll-tested sheep.