November 5, 2007
Ron Paul: Voice of Integrity, Stiffed by the Media (Brent Budowsky)
The Ron Paul phenomenon is worth serious attention because in a campaign that is vapid and empty of substance, this guy is the real deal.
Please note: Rep. Paul (R-Texas) would cut or end many of the programs that serve the children, the poor and the seniors and turn those responsibilities over to the free market. Bad idea.
However: Ron Paul is a true libertarian and devout believer in the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution at a time when virtually no major candidate in either party speaks of these matters with conviction and Congress does not stand up like a lion in defense of them.
To Ron Paul, the Constitution is sacred. He does not do focus groups to determine his support for freedom.
It is entertaining and profound to watch Paul, a veteran, speak in these debates against a disastrous war policy, standing near candidates competing for who can start the most new unwise wars, being hissed at by angry audiences ready to send others to die and ready to throw out long-held constitutional values.
Of course, the national political reporters don't have a clue about him. They are forced to report about him because he raises more money than Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). The issue they should be reporting is why so many people give money to a candidate because of what he stands for, and believes in, even when they disagree with many things he says.
Then again, the media treat Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Joseph Biden (D-Del.) and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) as though they don't exist even though all three have earned the right, through experience and achievement, to be heard. Yet they have not been heard, from day one until today.
It will be interesting to watch whether Ron Paul ends up running as a third-party libertarian candidate, in which case he will win enough support to affect the outcome, forcing the national press to pay attention to him.
Agree with him or not, let's tip our hat to Ron Paul, a great voice of authenticity, integrity and ideas, which are all, sadly, in short supply in American politics today.
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post
Share this post
What's This 24 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Things of value are easy to sell to the public when they make sense. If Ron Paul made any sense the public would eat it up. Ron Paul is the favorite of liberals everywhere, because he has no values or principals worth fighting for. He's just another version of America is bad, and let's retreat at the earliest opportunity.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2007 @ 9:59 am
Mr. Budowsky,
First allow me to compliment you on your willingness to acknowledge Dr. Paul as the only genuine statesman among a pack of corrupt politicians.
That being said, I'm afraid you misunderstand and misrepresent Dr. Paul's desire to end FEDERAL involvement in various programs which serve children, the poor and seniors. He only wants these programs returned to their rightful places: the local constituencies (State, County & municipality) which far better understand their unique needs and will provide for them with the compassion and understanding one can only expect of neigbors and friends, rather than from distant mandarins in Washington D.C.
Comment by Robert Eschauzier — November 5, 2007 @ 10:25 am
Name recognition is still unbelievably low, although it does seem to be growing. I've been handing out Ron Paul informational flyers to practically every person I meet, with my e-mail address on them, and I get more than 50 e-mail responses a week from a random person who thanked me for showing them the light.
Paul is polling close to 0 according to my registered Republican friends (mostly church-goers), but more than half of my democrat and progressive friends are giving him their support. How crazy is that?
I'm excited to see if there is a chance of Paul tripling his name recognition before the first primary. As more people hear of him, more opinions are made (either for or against), but Paul can't put his foot in his mouth as the other candidates can — he has never waffled on his opinions over 30 years.
That alone is bringing him a good amount of support from people who agree with some, disagree with some, but in the end can appreciate the idea of a politician who has let his actions speak for him — not his words.
Comment by A.B. Dada — November 5, 2007 @ 10:55 am
The media label of Ron Paul as a "long shot" candidate must end. He is clearly a "top tier" candidate.
I have put together a website to demonstrate clearly that Ron Paul dominates in every measurement other than the national polls.
Please visit www.thecaseforronpaul.com
Decide for youself.
Comment by Cleaner44 — November 5, 2007 @ 11:54 am
"Please note: Rep. Paul (R-Texas) would cut or end many of the programs that serve the children, the poor and the seniors and turn those responsibilities over to the free market. Bad idea."
Ron Paul has stated in MANY interviews, "cutting those programs are NOT MY goal".
While he is philosophically opposed, he has no desire to throw people out into the streets.
In fact, he has stated in MANY interviews, "if we cut our military empire spending overseas, there will be money left over to take care of people back home in the USA"
Maybe you just missed those interviews?
Also note, he is opposed to these social programs at the federal level, opting to allow states to design and implement these programs; thus cutting out the worthless, expensive overhead of federal bureaucrats.
Comment by tim — November 5, 2007 @ 12:19 pm
Lovely how the author lies so quickly.
No, Ron Paul has said explicitly and repeatedly that he would NOT cut welfare programs for those currently dependent upon them.
Why the lies, Brent?
Comment by Alex — November 5, 2007 @ 12:46 pm
Ron Paul has stated numerous times that while he is philosophically and Constitutionally opposed to federal welfare programs, eliminating them is not his goal. He wants to pull our troops back home from the myriad number of countries they are in, scale back our world empire, and save a bunch of money to shore up fiscal issues here at home.
Comment by Victor — November 5, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
Yeah, Brent will support anyone who threatens mainstream Republicans. This plot line is clear to anyone with half a brain.
Comment by Igor R. — November 5, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
Ron Paul is the only candidate who isn't a member of the CFR.
Ron Paul's record of voting against unConstitutional garbage is unmatched. Yes, he is the real deal.
Comment by FreedomJoyAdventure — November 5, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
Paul supports phasing out the programs you mentioned by funding them with money we would save by not policing the world and allowing people to opt out of them if they choose.
He would also eliminate the income tax and end inflation, two things that crush the poor.
Comment by Jason — November 5, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
Igor is correct. We all tend to support the out of mainstream candidates of the party that we oppose, as a way of sticking it in the eye of the other side.
Ron Paul is smart and appealing relating to the "war without end" part of the GOP. His domestic positions, however, are repugnant.
For us, blowing Paul up is every bit as insincere as the Right loving Holy Joe Lieberman.
Comment by Chris Calbi — November 5, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
It's amazing how uninformed some people are.
Comment by NH_GOP — November 5, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Mr Budowsky,
I appreciate your article, however, I think you will find that government aid and handouts are largely responsible for the poverty in American society. This is counterintuitive, but when you view the following graphs, you may see what I'm talking about:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/summary.htm
Comment by Travis Snyder — November 5, 2007 @ 8:12 pm
A "Voice of Integrity" has no place in the current GOP. Ron Paul would have been considered by his GOP mates as a conservative nut 30 years ago. With the troglodite neocons taking over the GOP, Ron Paull is now "liberal".
Comment by Lester Fields — November 5, 2007 @ 8:49 pm
Lester Fields, as usual you open your virtual mouth and leave no doubt about your level of intelligence. Ron Paul is EXTREMELY conservative on domestic issues. On foreign policy he is EXTREMELY isolationist, which the current flavor of the election cycle for the Democrats because Bush got involved in the Middle East. It's not generally a liberal position, just a stupid one.
Comment by Igor R. — November 5, 2007 @ 9:40 pm
[…] The Hill wrote an interesting post today on Ron Paul: Voice of Integrity, Stiffed by the MediaHere's a quick excerpt […]
Pingback by Hoybrown.Com » Ron Paul: Voice of Integrity, Stiffed by the Media — November 6, 2007 @ 4:44 am
Well written, as an expat living abroad most of the developed world sees Paul in a debate and appreciates his respect for his audience, agree with him or not. americans, like their currency, haven't a clue just how low they are going these days…sad as i love this country.
Comment by tiredcritique — November 6, 2007 @ 10:17 am
Brent your post is, as usual, well thought out. you are known to be friendly with many media figures. Do you ever call them to account5 on this issue? It is increasingly clear, from both parties, that a candidate gets categorized as A, B, or C. If they are not A, they are ignored, even when they can raise the type of money that Rep. Paul has.
We see this with the Democrats too. Chris Dodd deserves to be top tier, whether you support him or not. He is bringing real experience and real insight to this race.
Comment by Chris Calbi — November 6, 2007 @ 12:23 pm
In your article you state, "Rep. Paul (R-Texas) would cut or end many of the programs that serve the children, the poor and the seniors and turn those responsibilities over to the free market. Bad idea."
This is only partially true. Ron Paul wants to eliminate these costly, government-run programs…but he does not want to leave people hanging! His plan is keep supporting people who are on social security who are dependent on it now. He would pay for this by ending unnecessary overseas spending. But for young people, just starting out, they would not have to pay into social security, and could invest that money as they wish…instead of the government holding on to it.
As far as education is concerned, he supports states taking control instead of a centralized government telling everyone what to do. When the states take control of education, it's more localized and will allow for greater inclusion of people.
As for the poor…they won't be as poor when they stop paying social security, income taxes, and having their money spent overseas to support Israel, Africa, Iraq, and puppet governments all over the world!! Power to the people! RonPaul2008.com
Comment by Andy — November 6, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
What a luxury to have Andy present a cogent argument, rather than the bitter, jaded, criminal junk that comes from the other side anymore.
I don't agree with Rep. Paul, but he is a gentleman, and a patriot.
I look forward to the day when there can be a political debate in this country that isn't about hate and radical right wing spin.
Comment by Chris Calbi — November 6, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Chris, and I dream of the day when the Federal government gets out of people's lives.
Comment by Igor R. — November 6, 2007 @ 9:28 pm
Great article, except for the accusation about Paul wanting to get rid of funding for kids and elderly I think someone should do more research. Ron Paul is one of the only candidates who's voted against spending any of the social security money and proposed legislation during the Clinton adminstration so that others wouldnt be able to do take money out of Social Security and Medicare like Clinton was good at. I think those who brand Paul as a liberal because he wants to protect the troops and our American name by bring the troops home don't realize by invading and bombing other countries we are further isolating them from diplomacy and communication with the US. Those who brand Paul as an isolationist hasn't realized that The United States have had an embargo with Cuba for over 50 years and yet they are stil isolated from us. If we were to show them what freedom really is and allowing the people to understand Captialism they would oppose their current dictator. Paul Talks about true freedom of choice that we all should be able to have
Comment by Ben — November 10, 2007 @ 8:49 am
Question: You mention at the end of your statement that perhaps Ron Paul would end up on the 3rd party liberatarian ticket. Why wouldn't he be the number one choice of the Republican party for the ticket nomination? He is pro-life, less government, etc..everything that I always believed was associated with the Republician party. Plus, he has real military experience and voted no to go into IRAQ. He is the perfect choice…
Comment by Jill Duncan — November 25, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
100% FREE see this pages.
[@multi_txt.txt||2||r||1||
sativa handjob wifey cumshots /%/ Dont delete this links, its very useful for
Comment by free xxx porn — December 12, 2007 @ 7:29 pm