Article Image
IPFS News Link • Politics: Republican Campaigns

10 Twisted Reasons Not To Vote For Ron Paul

1. Ron Paul does not value equal rights for minorities. [Ron Paul values equal rights for all individuals.  No group is more equal than any other group ED] Ron Paul has sponsored legislation that would repeal affirmative action, keep the IRS from investigating private schools who may have used race as a factor in denying entrance, thus losing their tax exempt status, would limit the scope of Brown versus Board of Education, and would deny citizenship for those born in the US if their parents are not citizens. Here are links to these bills: H.R.3863, H.R.5909, H.J.RES.46, and H.J.RES.42.

2. Ron Paul would deny women control of their bodies and reproductive rights. [Ron Paul's position is this is a states rights issue.  The Federal Government has no BUSINESS to be involved with this issue. There is no provision in the constitution ED]  Ron Paul makes it very clear that one of his aims is to repeal Roe v. Wade. He has also co sponsored 4 separate bills to “To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” This, of course, goes against current medical and scientific information as well as our existing laws and precedents. Please see these links: H.R.2597 and H.R.392

3. Ron Paul would be disastrous for the working class.  [Ron Paul again is correct that the Federal Government has no BUSINESS to be involved with wages and or OSHA.  Further Social Security is a PONZI scheme and again not authorized by the Constitution. ED]  He supports abolishing the Federal minimum wage, has twice introduced legislation to repeal OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Act and would deal devastating blows to Social Security including repealing the act that makes it mandatory for employees of nonprofits, to make “coverage completely optional for both present and future workers”, and would “freeze benefit levels”. He has also twice sponsored legislation seeking to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act which among other things provide that contractors for the federal government must provide the prevailing wage and prohibits corporate “kick backs.” Here are the related legislative links: H.R.2030, H.R.4604, H.R.736, and H.R.2720

4. Ron Paul’s tax plan is unfair to lower earners and would greatly benefit those with the highest incomes. [Ron Paul is correct that the Federal Government has no ligitimate claim on inheritance.  ED],He has repeatedly submitted amendments to the tax code that would get rid of the estate and gift taxes, tax all earners at 10%, disallow income tax credits to individuals who are not corporations, repeal the elderly tax credit, child care credit, earned income credit, and other common credits for working class citizens. Please see this link for more information: H.R.05484 Summary

5. Ron Paul’s policies would cause irreparable damage to our already strained environment.  Among other travesties he supports off shore drilling, building more oil refineries, mining on federal lands, no taxes on the production of fuel, and would stop conservation efforts that could be a “Federal obstacle” to building and maintaining refineries. He has also sought to amend the Clean Air Act, repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977, and to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to “restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over the discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters”. To see for yourself the possible extent of the damage to the environment that would happen under a Paul administration please follow these links: H.R.2504, H.R.7079, H.R.7245, H.R.2415, H.R.393, H.R.4639, H.R.5293, and H.R.6936

6. A Ron Paul administration would continue to proliferate the negative image of the US among other nations.  [Wow is this one twisted!  Ron Paul would close the bases in countries we don't belong in (all of them) and stop MEDDLING in the affairs of other countries.  The United States would become the light on the hill once again ED]  Ron Paul supports withdrawing the US from the UN, when that has not happened he has fought to at least have the US withdrawn from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He has introduced legislation to keep the US from giving any funds to the UN. He also submitted that the US funds should not be used in any UN peacekeeping mission or any UN program at all. He has sponsored a bill calling for us to “terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.”Ron Paul twice supported stopping the destruction of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States. He also would continue with Bush’s plan of ignoring international laws by maintaining an insistence that the International Criminal Court does not apply to the US, despite President Clinton’s signature on the original treaty. The International Criminal Court is used for, among other things, prosecution of war crimes. Please see the following links: H.R.3891, H.AMDT.191, H.AMDT.190, H.R.3769, H.R.1665, H.CON.RES.23, and H.R.1154

7. Ron Paul discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and would not provide equal rights and protections to glbt citizens.  This is an issue that Paul sort of dances around. He has been praised for stating that the federal government should not regulate who a person marries. This has been construed by some to mean that he is somewhat open to the idea of same sex marriage, he is not. Paul was an original co sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act in the House in 2004. Among other things this discriminatory piece of legislation placed a prohibition on the recognition of a same sex marriage across state borders. He said in 2004 that if he was in the Texas legislature he would not allow judges to come up with “new definitions” of marriage. Paul is a very religious conservative and though he is careful with his words his record shows that he is not a supporter of same sex marriage. In 1980 he introduced a particularly bigoted bill entitled “A bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 A direct quote from the legislation “Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.” shows that he is unequivocally opposed to lifestyles other than heterosexual.

8. Ron Paul has an unnatural obsession with guns.  [The Founding fathers didn't write this into the 2nd amendment so hey could hunt.  This is ment to be a PROTECTION against government abuse. ED]  One of Paul’s loudest gripes is that the second amendment of the constitution is being eroded. In fact, he believes that September 11 would not have happened if that wasn’t true. He advocates for there to be no restrictions on personal ownership of semi-automatic weaponry or large capacity ammunition feeding devices, would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act (because we all know our schools are just missing more guns), wants guns to be allowed in our National Parks, and repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968. Now, I’m pretty damn certain that when the Constitution was written our founding fathers never intended for people to be walking around the streets with AK47′s and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices.” (That just sounds scary.) Throughout the years our Constitution has been amended and is indeed a living document needing changes to stay relevant in our society. Paul has no problem changing the Constitution when it fits his needs, such as no longer allowing those born in the US to be citizens if their parents are not. On the gun issue though he is no holds barred. I know he’s from Texas but really, common sense tells us that the amendments he is seeking to repeal have their place. In fact, the gun control act was put into place after the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Robert Kennedyz. Please view the following links: H.R.2424, H.R.1897, H.R.1096, H.R.407, H.R.1147, and H.R.3892.

9. Ron Paul would butcher our already sad educational system.  [The Federal Government IS NOT AUTHORIZED to be involved in the education of children.  It is the government that is dumbing down the children.  ED]The fact is that Ron Paul wants to privatize everything and that includes education. Where we run into problems is that it has been shown (think our current health care system) that this doesn’t work so well in practice. Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would keep the Federal Governmentfrom planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.” In a separate piece of legislation he seeks to “prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.” So basically the federal government can’t regulate teaching credentials and if states opt to require them for private schools they get no aid. That sounds like a marvelous idea teachers with no certification teaching in private schools that are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race. He is certainly moving forward with these proposals!Remember his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955? Guess what? He basically advocates for segregation in schools once again. It “Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.” Without thinking about this statement it doesn’t sound bad at all. But remember, when desegregating schools that this is done by having children go to different schools, often after a court decision as in Brown Vs. Board of Education. If this were a bill that passed, schools would no longer be compelled to comply and the schools would go back to segregation based on their locations. Ron Paul is really starting to look like a pretty bigoted guy don’t you think?

10. Ron Paul is opposed to the separation of church and state.  [Ron Paul is probably the BIGGEST champion of the division of church and state. ED]This reason is probably behind every other thing that I disagree with in regards to Paul’s positions. Ron Paul is among those who believes that there is a war on religion, he stated “Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view.” (( Koyaanisqatsi Blog: Wrong Paul Why I Do Not Want Ron Paul to be My President )) Though he talks a good talk, at times, Ron Paul can’t get away from his far right, conservative views. He would support “alternative views” to evolution taught in public schools (i.e. Intelligent Design.) We’ve already taken a look at his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955Besides hating the gays he takes a very religious stance on many other things. He is attempting to force his beliefs on the rest of America, exactly what he would do as president.

So there you have it, my 10 reasons not to vote for Ron Paul. Please take the time to thoroughly review the records of the people running for office so you know where they really stand. Ron Paul has good rhetoric and he opposes the war but he’s not a good man in the human rights sense of the phrase. He is pretty much like every other Republican but more insidious. Here is a video that you should watch after reading this article. Really listen to what he says and how he says it. Watch out for the sneaky ones and RESEARCH! ((Orcinus: Ron Paul’s Record in Congress ))


8 Comments in Response to

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Here’s why Ad Hominem cannot make you rational …

Psychictaxi Stop your Ad Hominem where you are good at, and prove to me where your mouth is. Examine what Paul say or do, and prove, if not to me, to yourself why, in spite of his courageous stand on critical issues [his courage is what I do admire], that there is even just an iota of a chance or of a possibility that the GOP will ever nominate him as its own Republican candidate for president, or if when the crow turns white and he becomes the GOP candidate for president, prove why he is NOT "unelectable".

In short, while millions of Americans all over the country against a handful of the likes of you, believe that he is "unelectable", come down to reality and prove to yourself -- not even necessarily to me -- that millions of Americans all over the country are all wrong ... that he CAN be elected president of the United States.

All of this jingoistic publicity that he is a good material candidate for president is only for the money, and you know it … at most RP is a messenger of free speech and that I agree – of the negativity of it, and in politics, a mouthpiece of the nation’s political "oddities" and most of the "unacceptable" thinking or ideas that describe him as an "unreliable" much more an "unelectable" candidate for president.

After this GOP presidential nomination campaign is over and Ron Paul comes out to be the GOP official candidate for president, come to me and tell me that I am terribly wrong … that I am an "epitome of the 'pot calling the kettle black'" – your uncalled for, unkind words. And if Ron Paul is nowhere or back to oblivion after this nomination process or when he did not end up as the GOP official candidate for president which I said he could never, never be, then no thank you for your stabbing compliments and apply it to yourself. I don’t deserve it because I am right, you deserve it because in cloud 9 you are the one who turns out to be terribly wrong.

I mean no offense to anyone, much more to Ron Paul, to you and the likes of you. I am just stating a wake up call to reality. If in your mind this is a sin, I don’t think that it is an unpardonable one.

Comment by Psychictaxi
Entered on:

Baka - you are the epitome of the 'pot calling the kettle black'!

Thanks for the chuckle anyway. 

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Exercise in futility …

If by any stretch of the imagination Ron Paul cannot be a GOP candidate for president, and if by any accident he is, this "unacceptable" Libertarian is nevertheless seen by the general public – and by millions of normal-thinking Americans across the country -- as an "unelectable" candidate!

Better wake up to reality as soon as you can before you suffer a cardiac arrest and die with shock with your dream that could never, never come true! This discussion about what Ron Paul thinks or wants to do or has done has NO meaningful purpose at all … it is an exercise in futility – just a waste of time energy.

Comment by Olde Reb
Entered on:


WOW !!! What a compilation of reasons to vote for Ron Paul. I whole-heartedly agree with Phychictaxi. The writer of the article expounds the rhetoric of statists and usurpation of State’s Rights supposedly secured by the Tenth Amendment. Ten beautiful reasons to vote for RON PAUL !!!!

Comment by Psychictaxi
Entered on:

Posted on the PrisonPlanet Forum:

Umm, the "living document" reference to the U.S. Constitution tells you all you need to know.  The person who wrote this is a statist... they would probably see eye-to-eye with the likes of Hamilton.

1. Opposing legislative favoritism and instead promoting individual liberty is always twisted by these types to claim racism.  They believe that people are incapable of decency sans government control and forced compliance to their definition of right and wrong.  These concepts are constants which should never be subject to the whim of politicians or the majority.  Societies are not perfect constructs, but they cannot be made so by governments, either.

2. Roe v. Wade removes the right of the states to determine what is best for their residents.  Notice that Ron Paul has never advocated for a ban on abortion, but rather the abolition of a federal mandate to not only tolerate it, but to accept it as a viable alternative to birth control.  His opposition to federal mandates like this is the promotion of states rights, nothing more.

3. Ron Paul opposes federal mandates upon the states for matters which clearly fall outside the purview of the federal government.  The federal government is, as the Founders stated repeatedly, the foreign agent for the states and an arbitrator in both interstate resolution and challenges to violations of the rights of individuals and the states.

4. Ron Paul's tax plan is to eventually eliminate the income tax as it is [erroneously] applied today.  While his intentions are indeed good, he may or may not be aware that his plan is at least on the right path to restoring the proper application of federal tax law.  The federal income tax, as it is written and as is the authority of Congress, applies only to a very limited scope of persons engaging in certain activities... none of which include merely living and working within the 50 states of the union.

5. Again, Ron Paul advocates the restoration of states rights.  After all, the states are independent Republics which are members of a union of nation states.  Where proponents of federal usurpation of states rights see a promotion of irresponsible behavior, Ron Paul sees the removal of the iron fist of tyranny from a central government overstepping its authority.

6. Article I Section 8 provides Congress with NO authority to contract or otherwise burden the states financially with membership to international councils.

7. Everyone is entitled to equal rights and protections under the law.  What promoters of same-sex marriage and other "glbt" type considerations want is SPECIAL rights and privileges, separate from those of everyone else.  What these dipshits don't realize is that marriage, at least with regard to legislative and regulatory recognition, is considered a privilege.  Should this not be a states rights issue as well?  The State's participation in a marital union is not necessary by law except when the parties to that union request special consideration from the government... do you really even understand what you're advocating here?

8. Read the 2nd Amendment and notice the last words... "the right of the People to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed."  We are ALL the "militia", and having our rights intact is indeed necessary for the security of a free state.

9. Again, Ron Paul feels that federal encroachment regarding matters clearly outside of Congress' Constitutional authority needs to be abolished.  Among those encroachments is the Federal Department of Education, the Federal Department of Labor, and a myriad of other usurping entities [illegally] granted regulatory authority over the states' prerogative for self-determination... do you understand what a Republican form of government is?

10. The Founders believed that the State (government in general) should be barred from creating laws or mandates which influence the People's right to the free exercise of religion.  However, this does not mean that those of any faith are barred from using the foundation of their religious faith in the furtherance of their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.  The 1st Amendment is a one-way obligation, restricting the government... not the People.  To address the remainder of your point... removing both obligations and restrictions regarding education provides a free market for education, where the People can choose, with their votes and tax dollars, how best to utilize the public trust with regard to their children's education.

Again, statists will fail to see the logic behind the removal of the federal government from their daily lives.  They have become so enamored with the ability to legislate taste and to utilize the federal government to force their idealism upon the states, they wouldn't recognize true freedom if their life depended upon it... and in fact, their life as a free individual DOES depend on it!

Big 'ups' to MonkeyPuppet. Good work.  Ed

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

The author is doing his public duty to wake up Paul supporters to reality …

I have asked several normal-thinking Republicans [not the odd ones who are eagerly pushing Ron Paul to run for president] if there is any chance Paul could be GOP's nominated candidate and if he is can he be elected president of the United States … and only one POSITIVE answer to my questions topped it all -- YES ... when the crow turns white!

Since then I also tried to wake up Paul supporters to reality that only when the crow changes its feathers from black to white [similar to Paul devotees’ reverse intellectual mutation from bad to worse or of color-blind perception of reality where the black crow is seen as white] can he ever become president!

I do not begrudge Mr. Ludwig, the author of this article, of his intention in pointing out to the American public these "10 cardinal sins" of GOP presidential aspirant Ron Paul which unfortunately the Texas Congressman’s butt-pushers in rage described as "vomit" or puke. Their tantrum [and recklessness in the use of civil or polite language] is understandable.

What I am concerned about is what makes those supporters so angry when presented with the reality of Ron Paul’s candidacy, to that point where they become so …soooo unreasonable! The only logical answer to that is the fact that instead of going smart, going dirty is an escape route of those whose cerebral cubicle is empty. And I am sad to note that this proves what kind of supporters Paul have that came out of the trench.

Comment by Matt Sch
Entered on: 

Comment by Matt Sch
Entered on:

why is this vomit posted here?