Posted: Dec. 21, 2012
Posted: Dec. 20, 2011
Posted: Aug. 18, 2011
Posted: Apr. 04, 2011
Posted: Nov. 03, 2010
Posted: Sep. 17, 2010
Posted: May. 20, 2010
Posted: Mar. 22, 2010
Posted: Jan. 23, 2010
Posted: Jan. 04, 2010
In the new polls out recently, Ron Paul is the leading Republican candidate for President of the United States, and you know, a lot of what he has to say makes sense, especially to the younger voters in this country. From doing away with the IRS, to lowering taxes, and of course legalizing drugs, who wouldn't agree with those things? That sounds like utopia right? Wrong!
In full disclosure I did a campaign video promoting Ron Paul in the early stages of the 2008 election because, like so many people in this country, I heard some great ideas but didn't truly understand the ramifications of what Dr. Paul would do to this country and the world at large should he win the presidency. I pulled that video shortly after and rescinded my support.
You see, Ron Paul isn't just a Libertarian, he's an anarchist. I'm not saying that I don't agree with some of the positions Ron Paul takes but when you start looking under the hood at the way more serious topics of discussion, much becomes clear about this candidate. Let's start by discussing Dr. Paul's foreign policy.
Ron Paul believes that the USA should immediately withdraw all troops from all foreign nations and cease any and all foreign aid efforts. Instead he believes that the money we are using to fund all of these programs should be returned to the citizens of the United States. Wow! On the surface this sounds like exactly what we need to be doing. Take care of the people here at home before ever reaching out to assist foreign countries and their people. Oh wait, there's no "before reaching out" involved here. No matter how much our country prospers, Ron Paul would never give foreign aid or assistance. And so, like everything else in life, it's just not that simple. Can you imagine what would happen if the USA became a completely sovereign nation that only existed to take care of itself no matter what is going on in the rest of the world? Think about it like this. If all the other countries got together and decided to wage war on the USA how on earth would we be able to protect ourselves? Too big for you? OK, how about the fact that if we were to cut off support to the middle east and allow horrible dictators, with whom we have no relationship, to take over and cut off the world's supply to the planet's oil reserves? We would be left in ruins and wars would break out in this country and abroad. The world economies would collapse overnight (beyond anything that is happening right now) and the people would be without power, gas, food, and shelter almost instantaneously.
But what about ending our dependence on foreign oil and finding alternative energy solutions such as solar and wind? I would love nothing more than to see that happen but right now the infrastructure simply isn't in place to allow those technologies to flourish on a national and/or global scale. We definitely need to ween ourselves off of our addiction to oil, coal, and natural gas, and make this planet, starting with our own country, completely green. That being said, you can't make that massive change overnight because we all drive cars that run off of gasoline. If we woke up tomorrow and the price of gas was $400/gallon no one could afford to fill up their tank. This means that people wouldn't get to work, trucks wouldn't deliver goods and services, planes would be grounded, and everything we know would cease. Catastrophic to say the least.
Alright, let's move beyond Dr. Paul's lack of any foreign policy and move on to abortion rights. Guess what? He's anti-abortion and would overturn Roe V. Wade. For someone who wants the government to get out of people's personal lives that is a pretty massive invasion of the women in this country. Regardless of your own personal beliefs about whether you think abortions should ever be performed, do you really want to make that decision for everyone else? What about cases of rape or incest? Should those women be forced to bear those children? What about cases where the mother will die if she carries the baby full-term? Should we allow that woman to die? While there do need to be rules and regulations regarding abortion, especially late term abortions, the women of this country fought long and hard ensure that they have the right to choose what is best for their own bodies and lives, and beyond that it is up to the physicians to whom we place our trust to recommend the proper course of action should a life or death scenario present itself.
Now let's move on to gun control. Ron Paul says that everyone should be able to own whatever kind of gun they choose, and as many as they want to own. This is absurd. Even if you are pro gun, which believe it or not I am too, there is absolutely no reason that someone needs to own an AK-47. That's not for home protection nor hunting. I do believe that everyone is entitled to own a gun as long as they pass a proper background check and take a gun safety course, however we need to limit gun ownership to those firearms that serve a purpose for home protection and/or hunting. This means small handguns and rifles. No Uzis, fully automatic machine guns, or extended clips holding 30 plus rounds in a Glock 9mm.
How about doing away with the EPA and the Department of Education? Dr. Paul believes the government shouldn't be involved in such things and instead these decisions should be left up to each individual state. Seriously? Dr. Paul is also for abolishing laws and regulations when it comes to our food and drug supply. Personally I like knowing that when I buy milk or produce in a grocery store that the products have been properly regulated and I'm not going to die after eating a bowl of cereal. Don't you? I also like knowing that the education system is standardized across every state. I don't want some right-wing southern state educating their children that black people are evil or banning books they don't feel agree with their own individual policies. I want the children of each state to have the same chances at a solid and well rounded education as the children in their neighboring states. That being said the DOE needs a serious revamp because the youth of this nation aren't doing too well these days and it's important that we put the right people in place to step up the game, while at the same time encouraging parents to take a vested interest in their children's future, ensuring that the kids of today are ready for the future of tomorrow.
An anarchist is defined as follows:
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a person who advocates the abolition of government and a social system based on voluntary cooperation
2. A person who causes disorder or upheaval
Ron Paul by definition is an anarchist and by doing away with all of these laws he would essentially be giving the citizens of these United States an open invitation to do whatever the hell they wanted without considering the massive consequences that would ensue shortly after. While we would all love some of what Ron Paul preaches, the vast majority of his ideas would quickly put an end to our society and that's something pretty serious to consider. Perhaps we should back someone who would appoint Dr. Paul to oversee the currency of this nation instead of trying to back him as the next leader of the free world? That's where he would truly shine and I think we can all agree that the Federal Reserve needs a serious audit.
Blog Images: (click an image to enlarge it)
FORGOT PASSWORD | REGISTER
HOME | NEWS | GALLERY | MEDIA | BLOG
BAND | FAN CLUB | CONTACTS | STORE
FAN CLUB: LOGIN | REGISTER
© audiolot - legal | privacy