“Five ‘Negative’ Reasons to Vote for Ron Paul”

I’d like to see some for “the other side”…

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

including one of my favorite:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.1789:

H.R.1789
Title: To restore the inherent benefits of the market economy by repealing the Federal body of statutory law commonly referred to as “antitrust law”, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron

Funny thing about market economies. They are based, in the modern age, on limited liability and juridical persons, i.e. government -sanctioned corporate power. Rothbard supported limited liability. These corporations are bound by their shareholders to maximize profit. Where possible this means eating up rivals. Where necessary this means bribing government.

And wasn’t Jeffersonianism ended by Jefferson, with the Louisiana purchase?

My challenge is really to Goff (as was yours) as well as the ever-the-Ron Paul promoter, Joshua Frank.

I’m not offering Kucinich as an ultimate alternative, but a comparative one given the field at this moment and most specifically the Conservative Libertarian Ron Paul.

The attractor for most pro-Paul progressives seems to be the US empire’s foreign policy and endless war. But, on that basis, Kucinich offers a very strong progressive comparison and then ups that with many other issues which Paul would never support.

So, again, I don’t want to cloud this straightforward comparison with the flavors of socialism vs single payer for all health care. We can save that for another discussion (in my humble opinion) and I’m more than happy to look more closely at the site you mention.

Max

Kucinich’s health plan is not anything like the truer socialized medicine supported by the Peace and Freedom Party; it’s VERY short of doing the trick. And speaking of Kucinich in terms of miscalculation vis-a-vis Obama is like saying we made a “mistake” in Iraq and Vietnam. Poor choice of words, to say the least. Anyone worth a dime on the presidential stump could not possibly have a kind word to say about Obama.

The “choice” is not to be limited as per the parameters put forth my Max Shields. The choices are much greater.

I recommend that readers go back up to the site I recommended above. It is the White Light Black Light blog which has posted the P&F Party stance vis-a-vis socialized medicine. That’s not to recommend voting for the P&F Party. That’s simply to give readers a shot at seeing Kucinich and his “health coverage” (and others’) approach in a better (more disgusting) light.

There are loads of people on my end here who are dying of cancer and the like. All the talk about the health plans offered by the “major candidates” is far worse than silly. It’s highly offensive.

Talk about Iraq and talk about The Environment –though absolutely necessary along with action on those counts– must not push aside the immediate need to embrace free health care for one and all. I believe that Stan’s article fails miserably on that count. As do some of the comments here.

There is no reason whatsoever to be involved in a discussion regarding where the money will come from when it’s obvious that there’s plenty of money available…if people will move in solidarity. Which means they must stop talking, lecturing and writing exclusively with their heartbeats.

To get motivated, sit in any local Emergency Room for a bit. Check in with yourself…to see to what degree you “relate” to the suffering people. Then resolve –if it’s in you– to get with people who want to change that easily changeable, disgusting fact of life…that people suffer unnecessarily.

We need to pull back from spending so much time going blah blah about the pros and cons of this and that prez candidate, and get with real people on our block…following a new paradigm.

Anyone who thinks that we’ve exhausted the means available for creating solidarity is greatly mistaken. I’m personally meeting with –or one of my colleagues will be meeting with– a few Hispanic students today at San Jose State University…to discuss mobilizing their community on counts touched upon above. In a NEW way.

That NEW way was derived from…first giving up on the old approaches…one of which was debating the worth of this and that Prez Candidate…and voting along the usual lines. Throwing up the old…in order to clear the air for new ideas. And that’s what happened.

You can see one approach that I came up with by viewing my “The Weight of It”…posted on the link I’ve provided above. Or you can contact the editors at DVoice and ask them to post the piece.

Blessings, Marcelle

Look can we keep the argument straight. Before entering into political calculation (which is what Kucinich did unwisely with Obama), the score card hasn’t even begun between Kucinich and Paul. First things first. I dare say Kucinich would score pretty high on your health care point (single Payer non-privatized health care for all). And Paul?

Again, this is all an academic exercise. Neither Paul nor Kucinich will be the candidates on their respective party tickets. The point is to flush out the differences between a Dem progressive and a Conservative Liberterian Republican.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7561

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/01042008/watch2.html