Ron Paul

All Crazy, All the Time

Ah, Ron Paul. Darling of the far-right, the libertarians, the racists, jackboots, separatists, angry militias... and anti-war college liberals.

He's come a long way from the wacky uncle type of the House of Representatives, the kind of guy who would bore you to tears with conspiracy theories over Thanksgiving dinner.

Now he's a major Republican contender (though he has little chance at the nomination) who has raised 20 million dollars for his Presidential campaign. The irony of his long-running crusade against the very paper money he acquires in such great volume is somewhat amusing in and of itself.But who, exactly, is Ron Paul, and what, exactly, does he stand for?

(Before I go any further, let me just give great thanks to David Neiwert, James Kirchick and all the other incredibly hard working journalists and citizens whose content this post attempts to summarize for easy reference. These people have done the yeoman's work on exposing the fraud that is Ron Paul, and should be commended for their citizenship. Thanks also to Wikipedia, the Southern Poverty Law Center, my roommate, friends, and anyone who bothers to read this besides myself)

List of Sub-Categories:

Ron Paul On:
--His Basic Biography
--Ties to Dangerous Crazies
--Abortion
--Religion
--Race
--Gays
--The Working Class
--Education
--Social Security
--The Environment
--International Relations
--Guns
--Taxes
--Money

Ron Paul Basic Biography
Ron Paul is currently a Congressman representing the 14th District of Texas; he has in the past been a representative for the 22nd District. His current territory encompasses much of the coastal area in and around the city of Galveston.

Ron Paul is originally from Green Tree, Pennsylvania, and was born on August 20th, 1935. Thus, he is currently 72 years old, making him one of the older Presidential candidates.

Ron Paul is a doctor, specifically an OB-GYN, who served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force. He earned his degree from Duke University.

Ron Paul is a registered Republican, but has previously sought the Libertarian nomination for the Presidency, in 1988.

That should be enough to get the ball rolling.

Source: Wikipedia (Ron Paul)
Wikipedia (14th Congressional District)
House Biography (warning, propaganda filled)

Darling of the Crayon Writing Lunatic Fringe
Ron Paul has long made a name for himself as a contrarian, Libertarian conservative. He claims to believe in the most absolute of strict constructionism, stating that he won't vote for any law that was not expressly permitted or required by the Constitution. From his official House bio:

He is known among both his colleagues in Congress and his constituents for his consistent voting record in the House of Representatives: Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.

This by itself puts Paul on both the edge of sanity and 'mainstream' political discourse. First of all, it's an incredibly regressive, reactionary and impractical position to take, especially when you're, you know, being elected to the Congress. Secondly, it's actually contrary to the intent of those who wrote the Constitution, who expressly allowed the document to, first, be amended, and second, to cover and confer rights they had not explicitly written in themselves:

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Constitution is not, despite what Paul and many Libertarians believe, a strictly limited document. The Founders, say what you will, recognized that people would want rights, and demand rights, that they themselves did not think to include; they added both the blanket cover of the 9th Amendment, and the Amendment process itself.

Further, the Constitution gives Congress, explicitly, some very broad legislative powers... it's hard to imagine many laws that you could argue are NOT authorized, except those asserting powers explicitly denied by the Constitution itself.

US Constitution, Article I, Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Note that part there about 'rovide for the common defense and general welfare'. That's a very broad cover. Congress has the power to make almost any law so long as it's in our national interest, as they themselves define it, and it does not violate the Constitution or its amendments, as interpreted by the Courts.

So why, exactly, insist on 'expressly permitted or required' laws?

Because you're a nut, and cater to nuts, and fear governmental power. That, or you can't read the document you claim to revere. I doubt a Doctor is illiterate.

Sources: US Constitution (at Cornell University)


Ron Paul has long associated with some very unsavory characters on the far right wing of the American political spectrum.

Lew Rockwell, for example, was Paul's longtime chief of staff, and is currently the head of a Libertarian think-tank called the Ludwig von Mises Institute. This Institute is connected with the Neo-Conservative movement, and has been sharply criticized by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Ludwig von Mises Institute
Auburn, Ala.

Headed up by Llewelyn Rockwell Jr., the Ludwig von Mises Institute is devoted to a radical libertarian view of government and economics inspired by the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, whom the institute says "showed that government intervention is always destructive."

Indeed, the institute aims to "undermine statism in all its forms," and its recent interest in neo-Confederate themes reflects that.

Rockwell recently argued that the Civil War "transformed the American regime from a federalist system based on freedom to a centralized state that circumscribed liberty in the name of public order."

Desegregation in the civil rights era, he says, resulted in the "involuntary servitude" of (presumably white) business owners. In the past, Rockwell has praised the electoral success of European neofascists like Joerg Haider in Austria and Christoph Blocher in Switzerland.

Both Rockwell and institute research director Jeffrey Tucker are listed on the racist League of the South's Web page as founding members — and both men deny their membership. Tucker has written for League publications, and many League members have taught at the institute's seminars and given presentations at its conferences.

At the recent Austrian Scholars Conference, the F.A. Hayek Memorial Lecture was delivered by Donald Livingston, director of the League's Summer Institute. In 1994, Thomas Fleming, a founding League member and the editor of Chronicles magazine, spoke on neo-Confederate ideas to an institute conference.

Rockwell, who is also vice president of the Center for Libertarian Studies, runs his own daily news Web site that often features articles by League members.

Along with being his chief of staff, Rockwell was instrumental in writing the now infamous Ron Paul survivalist newsletters, which contained a copious bounty of racist, bigoted, hate speech and lunatic conspiracy theories... and made Paul a very large amount of money.

Financial records from 1985 and 2001 show that Rockwell, Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982, was a vice president of Ron Paul & Associates, the corporation that published the Ron Paul Political Report and the Ron Paul Survival Report. The company was dissolved in 2001. During the period when the most incendiary items appeared—roughly 1989 to 1994—Rockwell and the prominent libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard championed an open strategy of exploiting racial and class resentment to build a coalition with populist "paleoconservatives," producing a flurry of articles and manifestos whose racially charged talking points and vocabulary mirrored the controversial Paul newsletters recently unearthed by The New Republic.

...

The publishing operation was lucrative. A tax document from June 1993—wrapping up the year in which the Political Report had published the "welfare checks" comment on the L.A. riots—reported an annual income of $940,000 for Ron Paul & Associates, listing four employees in Texas (Paul's family and Rockwell) and seven more employees around the country. If Paul didn't know who was writing his newsletters, he knew they were a crucial source of income and a successful tool for building his fundraising base for a political comeback.

These newsletters are hardly a fluke, or a short-term thing, as revealed by The New Republic:

Paul's newsletters have carried different titles over the years--Ron Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report--but they generally seem to have been published on a monthly basis since at least 1978. (Paul, an OB-GYN and former U.S. Air Force surgeon, was first elected to Congress in 1976.) During some periods, the newsletters were published by the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, a nonprofit Paul founded in 1976; at other times, they were published by Ron Paul & Associates, a now-defunct entity in which Paul owned a minority stake, according to his campaign spokesman. The Freedom Report claimed to have over 100,000 readers in 1984. At one point,
Ron Paul & Associates also put out a monthly publication called The Ron Paul Investment Letter.

The Freedom Report's online archives only go back to 1999, but I was curious to see older editions of Paul's newsletters, in part because of a controversy dating to 1996, when Charles "Lefty" Morris, a Democrat running against Paul for a House seat, released excerpts stating that "opinion polls consistently show only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions," that "if you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be," and that black representative Barbara Jordan is "the archetypical half-educated victimologist" whose "race and sex protect her from criticism." At the time, Paul's campaign said that Morris had quoted the newsletter out of context. Later, in 2001, Paul would claim that someone else had written the controversial passages.

(Few of the newsletters contain actual bylines.)

So Paul published a series of these things, over the years, and made a lot of money off of them. He has associations with the right-wing fringe, the far fringe, of political thought.

He also has ties to those who would take those ideas and try to implement them.

From Mother Jones:

When I read this very well-documented story in the Lone Star Times about the $500 donation to Ron Paul from well-known white supremacist Don Black, I didn't really blame Paul for taking the money. After all, it's hard to screen out every kook in advance. I assumed Paul would immediately return the money (or donate it to a group like the Holocaust Museum), prevent a link on Black's Neo-Nazi website, Stormfront, from connecting to the campaign's donation page, and announce these moves on the official Ron Paul website. I assumed wrong.

Five days after the Lone Star Times story appeared, Paul spokesman Jesse Benton told the paper he was still unsure whether the campaign would return Black's money. "At this time, I cannot say that we will be rejecting Mr. Black’s contribution," he said, "but I will bring the matter to the attention of our campaign director again, and expect some sort of decision to be made in coming days." Would the campaign at least block fundraising links from Stormfront's IP address? Again, Benton said, he'd have to bring up the idea with the campaign director.

Since then, more than two weeks have passed without an update from the Paul campaign, so I sent Benton and email today asking what the campaign manager had decided. Would Paul be returning Black’s money and blocking further donations from Stormfront? A few minutes later he wrote back, and this is what he said:

Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and the protection of inalienable individual rights for every American. All of our campaigns energy is dedicated to spreading the message of liberty and limited government, and we do not spend time screening donors or blocking websites. We don’t know who Don Black is, and pay him no attention. If a small number individuals who hold racist beliefs want to waste their money by giving to Dr. Paul, a man who stands firmly against their small minded ideologies, then the campaign will simply use those funds to protect freedom, peace and civil liberties across our Nation.

So Paul will happily take money from white-supremacists, claiming he doesn't know them.

Or does he? Remember how his campaign said they didn't know who Don Black was?

Funny... http://firedoglake.com/2008/01/10/moral-responsibility/ Here you have a picture of Paul with Mr. Black, of Stormfront. A man Dr. Paul doesn't know... and whose money he's happy to accept.

What, exactly, is Stormfront? Why, a thriving online Neo-Nazi community!
Source: Southern Poverty Law Center

To the thousands of white supremacists who regularly visit Stormfront and its forum, Kelso is best known by his e-moniker, "Charles A Lindbergh." He signs off all his posts with a quote from Lindbergh, a well-known racist and anti-Semite: "We can have peace and security only as long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood."

"I admire the aviator so much, " Kelso says.

The aviator, were he still alive, might well admire Kelso. As Stormfront celebrates its 10th birthday — the first major hate site on the Internet, it was created by former Alabama Klan leader Don Black in 1995

— Kelso has much to be proud of. In the three years he's been a senior moderator of the site, it has grown from fewer than 10,000 registered users to, as of mid-June, an astounding 52,566. And while many thousands of that ever-growing total probably haven't visited in years, independent Web monitors recently ranked Stormfront the 338th largest electronic forum on the Internet, putting it easily into the top 1% of all sites on the World Wide Web.

Black and Kelso have created something more than just another hate site that draws people for a few months, then fades for lack of interest. Using everything from good manners to "white scholarships" to such catchy gimmicks as highlighting its members' birthdays, these two men have built something that very few people on the entire Internet have — a genuine and very large cyber-community. That they did it at a time when major neo-Nazi groups are on the decline is merely icing.

"Without a doubt," Bob DeMarais, a former staff member of the neo-Nazi National Alliance (see related story), wrote recently, "Stormfront is the most powerful active influence in the White Nationalist movement."

Want to find the latest headlines on black-on-white crime? Go to Stormfront. New developments in the National Alliance's leadership woes? Go to Stormfront. Details of yet another nefarious Jewish conspiracy? Go to Stormfront.

Stormfront's recent growth spurt is only the beginning, Kelso says. He and Black share a larger goal, one that their friend Duke also tried with a fair measure of success — establishing real legitimacy in the realm of public opinion.

Ron Paul has also made numerous appearances before racist, neo-confederate or right-wing extremist groups, given interviews to their media outlets, and advanced their crackpot theories on the New World Order in general. See Here

So, to wrap up. Paul's former chief of staff? Radical Neo-Confederate. Paul supporter Don Black? Neo-Nazi former Klansmen. (And Paul has nothing bad to say about either of them. Funny that.)

Endorsements for Paul also include many members of the Constitution Party, a radical ultra-right wing political party full of anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-UN type positions, as well as David Duke, famed KKK leader, the Jefferson Republican Party, another tiny right wing loon group known for supporting far-right judge Roy Moore, as well as the Ohio branch of the Reform Party, the eclectic group of loons originally founded by Ross Perot.

Sounds like a lovely group of whackos, doesn't it?


Sources: Reason.com
Southern Poverty Law Center (Neo-Confederate Listing)
Southern Poverty Law Center (Stormfront article)
Mother Jones
The New Republic
Wikipedia (Constitution Party)
Wikipedia (Jefferson Republican Party)
Wikipedia (Ron Paul Endorsements)
Orcinus (Ron Paul and His Followers)
(Ron Paul vs. The New World Order)
Ron Paul On the Issues:

Ron Paul On Abortion
What is Ron Paul's take on abortion? Well, let's find out!

The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.

In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.

In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094.

I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.

I have also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.”

Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken direct action to restore protection for the unborn.

Source: RonaPaul2008.com

Well, that was fairly easy, wasn't it? Not only is Ron Paul anti-choice, but he thinks human life begins at conception.... and he has tried to make that the law of the land several times.

-- He wants to erase the distinction in U.S. law between a zygote and a person
H.R.2597: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.

H.R.1094: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.

H.R.776: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception

Source: Orcinus

So Ron Paul is extremely anti-choice, and has tried to ban all abortions by designating that a zygote is human life. He actively seeks to overturn Roe vs. Wade by Congressional edict, failing to understand, I suppose, that Roe v. Wade is a: not the law of the land anymore (that's Casey vs. Planned Parenthood), and b: that these rulings are based on Constitutional privacy principles, and thus can't be overriden by Congress, except by an amendment.

Oh wait, silly me. He got that one too.

H.R.392: A bill proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right to life.

Ron Paul on Religion
What does Ron Paul believe about religion?

Well, you won't find his website toting any of his grand ideas about religious freedom. But you can get some idea from his Congressional Record...

-- He would deny the use of the Federal court system -- and even Federal precedent -- to people discriminated against because of their religious beliefs or sexual orientation. This would also limit the cross-state recognition of same-sex marriages.

Some of these bills he cynically calls this the "We the People Act".
H.R.300: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.4379: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.5739: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.3893: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.1547: To restore first amendment protections of religion and religious speech.

H.R.4922: To restore first amendment protections of religion and speech.

H.R.5078: To restore first amendment protections of religion and speech.

Ahh, isn't it nice how he titles some of the bills to mean exactly the opposite of what they do? Let's take a closer look at two, picked at random.

H.R.... oh, 3893, why not.

SUMMARY AS OF:
3/4/2004--Introduced.


We the People Act - Prohibits the Supreme Court and each Federal court from adjudicating any claim or relying on judicial decisions involving: (1) State or local laws, regulations, or policies concerning the free exercise or establishment of religion; (2) the right of privacy, including issues of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or (3) the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation where based upon equal protection of the laws.

Allows the Supreme Court and the Federal courts to determine the constitutionality of Federal statutes, administrative rules, or procedures in considering cases arising under the Constitution. Prohibits the Supreme Court and the Federal courts from issuing any ruling that appropriates or expends money, imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legislative functions or administrative discretion of the States.

Authorizes any party or intervener in matters before any Federal court, including the Supreme Court, to challenge the jurisdiction of the court under this Act.

Provides that the violation of this Act by any justice or judge is an impeachable offense and a material breach of good behavior subject to removal.

Negates as binding precedent on the State courts any Federal court decision that relates to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction by this Act.

So you'd no longer have the right to sue for discrimination on the basis of religion, sexual orientation or marriage equality if your state decides to discriminate against you, or allow said discrimination.

Under this law, your state could declare an official religion, compel church attendance, and, oh, for laughs, imprison you if you weren't... a Baptist. For a lark.

Source: Library of Congress

Let's take another. HR.... 4922.

SUMMARY AS OF:
6/12/2002--Introduced.

First Amendment Restoration Act - Denies jurisdiction to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, U.S. district courts, and the District Courts of Guam, the Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands, to hear or determine religious freedom-related cases.

This one only gets you on the religious angle, I guess. Hope you like theocracy, Ron Paul supporters!

Source: Library of Congress

Ron Paul on Race
How does Ron Paul feel about race? Well, let's go to the Congressional Record to start.

Ron Paul thinks that it's too easy to become a citizen; you shouldn't get in just because you were born here. This is a commonly held position of the race-baiting anti-hispanic fringe, naturally.

-- He would propose an amendment to the Constitution to gut the Fourteenth Amendment by denying citizenship to people born here whose parents aren't already citizens "nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States". That latter part could produce some serious political discrimination, especially if radicals can have their citizenship revoked:
H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

H.J.RES.42:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

But the true feelings of Ron Paul are perhaps best expressed by his self-published newsletters. Let's take a survey of the highlights, shall we?

"A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism" analyzes the Los Angeles riots of 1992: "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided."

The November 1990 issue of the Political Report had kind words for David Duke.

This newsletter describes Martin Luther King Jr. as "a world-class adulterer" who "seduced underage girls and boys" and "replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration."

The January 1991 edition of the Political Report refers to King as a "world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and a "flagrant plagiarist with a phony doctorate."

A February 1991 newsletter attacks "The X-Rated Martin Luther King."

An October 1990 edition of the Political Report ridicules black activists, led by Al Sharpton, for demonstrating at the Statue of Liberty in favor of renaming New York City after Martin Luther King. The newsletter suggests that "Welfaria," "Zooville," "Rapetown," "Dirtburg," and "Lazyopolis" would be better alternatives--and says, "Next time, hold that demonstration at a food stamp bureau or a crack house."

Ha Ha, that Wacky Dr. Paul. He likes David Duke! He thinks black people are all lazy, welfare-dependent crack addicts!

Wait, wait, here's another:

Ron Paul: 95 percent of black men are ‘criminal.’

Kos highlights a 1992 article from Ron Paul’s self-published newsletter, The Ron Paul Political Report:

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action…. Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the “criminal justice system,” I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.

Be afraid of Blacks, America! Dr. Paul says so! They are also too stupid to understand politics!

Remember folks, these are from newsletters published under his name, for sale, for his personal profit.

He can deny he's a racist all he wants, or claim that somehow, for many years, this stuff was published without his knowledge, but HE CASHED THE CHECKS. Keep that in your minds.

Sources: The New Republic (and Ron Paul's Newsletters)
Think Progress

Ron Paul on Gays
As noted in the Religion section, Paul has proposed laws to allow states to discriminate against gays, deny them marriages and equal rights, and the like. See that section for more details on his legislative efforts to make gay people second-class citizens. Let's see some more of that trademark Paul bigoted flamethrowing!

In the course of defending homophobic comments by Andy Rooney of CBS, a 1990 newsletter notes that a reporter for a gay magazine "certainly had an axe to grind, and that's not easy with a limp wrist."

The June 1990 issue of the Political Report says: "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."

From the August 1990 issue of the Political Report: "Bring Back the Closet!"

A January 1994 edition of the Survival Report states that "gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense," adding: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."

Gay men are suicidal! Gays are limp-wristed sex-fiends! Gays should shut up and go back into hiding!

Hilarious, Dr. Paul!

Source: The New Republic (and Ron Pauls Newsletters)

Ron Paul on the Working Class
Ron Paul's site is conspicuously bereft of information about how he plans to help the working class... perhaps that's because he plans to injure them, as grievously as possible.

In fact, Ron Paul is against unions, the minimum wage, and worker safety (he seeks to dismantle OSHA)!

-- He has tried to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act:
H.R.2310: A bill to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.

H.R.13264: A bill to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970

-- He would like to make it much easier to decertify labor unions:
H.R.694: To amend the National Labor Relations Act to permit elections to decertify representation by a labor organization.

-- He opposes the Minimum Wage:
H.R.2962: A bill to repeal all authority of the Federal Government to regulate wages in private employment.

-- He would deny the prevailing wage to employees of federal contractors, and remove prohibition on kickbacks in Federal projects:
H.R.736: To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act.

H.R.2720: To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act.

-- He wants to severely weaken Social Security:
H.R.2030: A bill to amend the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to make social security coverage completely optional for both present and future workers, to freeze benefit levels, to provide for the partial financing of future benefits from general revenues subject to specified conditions, to eliminate the earnings test, to make changes in the tax treatment of IRA accounts, and for other purposes.

H.R.4604: A bill to repeal the recently enacted requirement of mandatory social security coverage for employees of nonprofit organizations.

Ron Paul wants the poor to get poorer, and lose their limbs in the process. What a charming individual!

Source: Orcinus

Ron Paul on Education
This one's a doozy. First, go read my roommate's post on how Ron Paul wants Home Schooling to be equivalent to a public educational degree, with no standards or oversight.

You back yet? Ok. So your neighbors can educate their kids to believe solely in the Great Pumpkin, and that's all right with Ron Paul. No standards, no oversight, nothing. Crazy religious cults will have their way with kids completely, and brainwashed armies of nuts will roam your streets. This wil be paid for with your tax dollars.

It gets better though. Ron Paul is a proud signing member of the Alliance for the Separation of School and State. Their position on education? One simple sentence.

"I proclaim publicly that I favor ending government involvement in education."

There you have it. Ron Paul will get rid of all public education, if he has his way. All of it. Every single school. Every single teacher.

Gone.

Source: Alliance for the Separation of School and State

Ron Paul on Social Security
As noted above in the Working Class section, Ron Paul hates him some Social Security. He wants to destroy the system as we know it entirely; it would be completely optional for present and future workers, benefit levels would freeze, so that inflation can take care of our excess elderly, and... well that about sums it up. It's a pretty simple position really. Bankrupt the system, screw those already paid in.

-- He wants to severely weaken Social Security:
H.R.2030: A bill to amend the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to make social security coverage completely optional for both present and future workers, to freeze benefit levels, to provide for the partial financing of future benefits from general revenues subject to specified conditions, to eliminate the earnings test, to make changes in the tax treatment of IRA accounts, and for other purposes.

H.R.4604: A bill to repeal the recently enacted requirement of mandatory social security coverage for employees of nonprofit organizations.

Source: Orcinus

Ron Paul on the Environment
Ron Paul doesn't seem to care much for the environment. He's in favor of weakening the Clean Air Act, water protection, soil protection, and so forth. He is also in favor of off-shore oil drilling, removing the Federal taxes on gas and oil, increasing coal mining, letting people dump more or less whatever they want into the rivers.... and so forth.

-- He would limit or try to repeal various environmental protection laws and regulations, including the Clean Air Act, the Soil and Water Conservation Act, and the use of devices that protect the "bycatch" of sea life:
H.J.RES.104: To disapprove a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to proposed revisions to the national pollutant discharge elimination system program and Federal antidegradation

policy and the proposed revisions to the water quality planning and management regulations concerning total maximum daily load.

H.R.3735: To disapprove a rule requiring the use of bycatch reduction devices in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of Mexico.

H.R.4423: To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide that the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery shall be managed in accordance with such fishery management plans, regulations, and other conservation and management as applied to that fishery on April 13, 1998.

H.R.2504: A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to postpone for one year the application of certain restrictions to areas which have failed to attain national ambient air quality standards and to delay for one year the date required for adoption and submission of State implementation plans applicable to these areas, and for other purposes.

H.R.7079: A bill to repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977.

H.R.7245: A bill to amend section 404 of 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 which are navigable and for other purposes.

Ron Paul also has a lot of bills relating to the shrimp industry and trying to block competition. Maybe he's in their pocket?

-- He would promote offshore oil-drilling, the construction of more refineries, coal-mining on Federal lands, and block conservation measures. This would further threaten our coastal and internal environments, and further trap our economy in fossil-fuel dependency:
H.R.2415: To reduce the price of gasoline by allowing for offshore drilling, eliminating Federal obstacles to constructing refineries and providing incentives for investment in refineries, suspending Federal fuel taxes when gasoline prices reach a benchmark amount, and promoting free trade.

H.R.4004: To reduce the price of gasoline by allowing for offshore drilling, eliminating Federal obstacles to constructing refineries and providing incentives for investment in refineries, suspending Federal fuel taxes when gasoline prices reach a benchmark amount, and promoting free trade.

H.R.393: A bill to amend section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters which are navigable and for other purposes.

H.R.4639: A bill to repeal all Federal regulations and taxes on the production of fuel.

H.R.5293: A bill to prohibit the imposition of unreasonable severance taxes or fees on coal or lignite mined from Federal lands.

H.R.6936: A bill to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from promulgating any federal emergency energy conservation plan which would restrict recreational boating.

-- He has fought ratification of the Law of the Sea. As President would he "un-sign" it? [More here.]
H.CON.RES.56: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should not ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty.

Source: Orcinus http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html

Ron Paul On International Relations
Ahh, International Relations. Here Paul really shines. He wants to, more or less, end them.

Paul wants us out of the United Nations, lock stock and barrel. Paul wants us to kick them out of the country, more or less. Paul wants us to stay out of the International Criminal Court. Paul wants us out of UNESCO for some reason.

This is of course perfectly in line with his crazy-ass friends on the conspiracy loving right, who think that the UN is a tool of the Antichrist, literally, and dedicated to seducing their children into Satan's army.

I'd post some of the bills he's tried to pass here, but they're all the same really. Cut funds, cut privileges, get us out of the UN, etc. Go see the Orcinus page copiously linked here if you want more details.

Ron Paul on Guns
Ron Paul wants to get rid of background checks on guns, and requirements for gun-locks; he wants to use the Federal government to overrule state regulations on concealed weapons, and Paul wants to give gun ownership to minors, recent felons, fugitives, addicts, domestic abusers and more!

I hope you like hearing gunshots in the night, America. Ron Paul wants guns in the hands of anyone with hands; he'd probably work something out for amputees involving an elaborate sling. He is, after all, a doctor.

Source: Orcinus

Ron Paul on Taxes
Tax policy and libertarians are like... well, oil and fire I suppose. Mixing them is never a good idea,

as libertarians tend to be greedy, self-absorbed, short-sighted misers in addition to their paranoid fear of the government that taxes fund.

Ron Paul is no different. He has proposed an amendment to ban the Income, Estate and Gift taxes, several times.

He has also tried to instead set the income tax rate at 10%, which wouldn't fund much of a bake-sale, let alone a government; again, many times.

He also wants you to pay your income taxes every month, and not automatically have them withheld. So your April annual headache? TIMES TWELVE! WHEEEE

Source: Orcinus

Ron Paul on Money
Ok, you may have thought Ron Paul was strange before, but this is the ultimate. This is his personal obsession. He's written several books on the subject of money, and has some pretty in-depth views of monetary policy that need to be discussed.

In the same way that a schizophrenic delusion needs to be discussed, at least until the thorazine kicks in.

Ron Paul is obssessed with money; specifically, paper money and gold. He hates the former; loves the latter.

Ron Paul is one of those right-wing cranks who thinks that, because paper money is not backed by gold, that it has no value. He wants to put us on the gold standard; he wants to make federal paper money OPTIONAL, and only the government has to take it; he wants to let the states print their own currency.

Yes, you read that correctly. Fifty states, fifty kinds of coin. I hope you don't like to travel much.

-- Does he want to abandon the dollar and set up 50 separate state currencies? Does that even make sense?
H.R.2779: To repeal section 5103 of title 31, United States Code.

H.R.3931: A bill to amend the Coinage Act of 1965 to provide that coins and currencies of the United States, including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations, shall be legal tender only for the payment of Federal taxes, duties and dues.

He also wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve, which has helped to alleviate, if not prevent outright, many recessions in the last fifty years by carefully controlling the monetary supply; they're doing less than a bangup job under the current administration, however.

So under a Ron Paul world, you'd have to change your coins at every state border; you'd be carrying around actual gold and silver in your pocket; you'd also face constant currency fluctuations because, you know, people need gold to make stuff, and find it in the ground all the time, so its actual real world quantity, and hence value, is, well, out of our hands. David Neiwart explains:

As I explain in Chapter 5 of In God's Country: The Patriot Movement and the Pacific Northwest:
The Freemen justified this with an argument straight out of Roy Schwasinger's seminars: The federal government was bankrupt and illegally printing bogus money anyway, money that no longer had any basis, since the government took the dollar off the gold standard in 1971. So the Freemen were free to create their own money out of equally thin air -- not only that, but by basis of the "constitutional" nature of the common-law courts that issued the liens, their system was more legitimate than the federal government's.

The alternative-universe notion that the Federal Reserve system prints "funny money" based on no real foundation has floated about on the far right for years, and is a key component of some cult belief systems like Lyndon LaRouche's. In reality, the modern international monetary system is based on the economic engine behind each kind of currency -- the levels of supply and demand that a nation produces.

It is, like all economic systems, essentially a mental construct, but it has very real grounding in the work of producing goods and services within each nation. The American dollar's continuing strength abroad is a reflection of our nation's output; indeed, it is still considered the basis of most international currency rates.

Those who argue that money must be based on some hard commodity -- usually gold and silver -- ignore the fact that when a currency is based on gold, the value given to gold is as essentially arbitrary as that assigned to paper currency. That is, the value of gold would rise and decline according to the value of the output behind the economic system using it as a standard. Indeed, since gold is still used in manufacturing and jewelry-making, the crossover between gold as a commodity and gold as an expression of currency had the tendency to destabilize the currency system, which is why the United States went off the gold standard in 1971.

So who's for financial insecurity, recessions, and monetary policy determined by right-wing cranks?

Ron Paul!

Source: Orcinus

General Sources: Firedoglake
The New Republic
Orcinus
Orcinus
Wikipedia: Various

UPDATE: I fixed the broken subheading and link at the top for the International Relations section. I plan to go back and make minor grammar and punctuation fixes at a later date.