Ron Paul: Why are Americans so angry? - very powerful speech

[thereismore]

Sorry if dupe, but this speech by Rep. Ron Paul is a true classic. It is hard to excerpt from, because it is so powerful, but here are a few paragraphs. Read the whole thing though:

Why are Americans so angry?
---------------------------

"If the truth is admitted, it would appear that the lives lost and the money spent have been in vain. Instead, more casualties must be sustained to prove a false premise. What a tragedy! If the truth is admitted, imagine the anger of all the families that already have suffered such a burden. That burden is softened when the families and the wounded are told their great sacrifice was worthy, and required to preserve our freedoms and our Constitution.

...

I would concede that there are some-- especially the die-hard neoconservatives, who believe it is our moral duty to spread American goodness through force and remake the Middle East-- who neither suffer regrets nor are bothered by the casualties. They continue to argue for more war without remorse, as long as they themselves do not have to fight. Criticism is reserved for the wimps who want to “cut and run.”


...

Constitutional and moral restraints on war should be strictly followed. It is understandable when kings, dictators, and tyrants take their people into war, since it serves their selfish interests-- and those sent to fight have no say in the matter. It is more difficult to understand why democracies and democratic legislative bodies, which have a say over the issue of war, so readily submit to the executive branch of government. The determined effort of the authors of our Constitution to firmly place the power to declare war in the legislative branch has been ignored in the decades following WWII."

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr062906.htm

Most of the Congress just keeps on ignoring the truth. :banghead:

[yellerpup]

1. Outstanding speech.

Stirring.

[autorank]

2. The last paragraph... K&R

Constitutional and moral restraints on war should be strictly followed. It is understandable when kings, dictators, and tyrants take their people into war, since it serves their selfish interests-- and those sent to fight have no say in the matter. It is more difficult to understand why democracies and democratic legislative bodies, which have a say over the issue of war, so readily submit to the executive branch of government. The determined effort of the authors of our Constitution to firmly place the power to declare war in the legislative branch has been ignored in the decades following WWII."

I will now refrain from any inner dialogue when I read Paul's great foreign policy and constitional rights statements ("Well why doesn't he caucus with the Democrats?").

This is exactly what Al Gore said in DC on 1/16/06. It's the pure TRUTH.

Thank you for posting this.

[Taverner]

3. Ron Paul is one of the few Republicans I like

I don't agree with him on everything (I happen to like Keynesian Welfareism) but he sticks by his words, and is a real Libertarian.

[rusty_parts2001]

5. Ron Paul belongs in the 19th Century

Perhaps because of his vociferous opposition to the war in Iraq and now his call for impeaching Bush, a lot of progressives say that Ron Paul is their kind of Republican congressman. Some go so far as to say they'd rather Paul be re-elected over Shane Sklar.

However, they are probably unaware of the breadth of Paul’s strange Libertarian philosophy. They should know that they are throwing in with a guy who holds decidedly 19th century views – on race, health care, aid to the needy and dispossessed, and the border with Mexico.

Paul and some progressive may come down on the same side on some issues, but it’s pretty clear they didn’t get there on the same path. And I would imagine that almost every progressive would deem many of Paul's other views as reprehensible, at minimum. The proof is below, in Ron Paul’s own words.

A 19th Century Vision

Republican Ron Paul missed out on the 19th century, but he admires it from afar. He speaks lovingly of the good old days before things like Social Security and Medicaid existed, before the federal government outlawed drugs like heroin.

Race
“If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably-fleet-footed they can be.”
read more here:
http://victoriakos.blogspot.com/

[Taverner]

6. No I'm aware of his bare bones government philosophy

But right now, I really wish the US Government would start becoming more bare bones...

Lots of so called progressive congresscritters have weird ideas. Byrd was in the KKK, Dennis Kucinich was pro-life as was Al Gore. Hell, even Nader thinks Israel has no right to exist.

But right now the progressive movement needs more friends and less enemies.

[nosillies]

4. I read it this morning and got a little disgruntled at first.

I know lots of poor people who don't have computers, cell phones, etc. Good grief!

But I kept reading. He is extremely eloquent, although I just can't always agree with everything he says.

[thereismore]

7. very well said. I too was disgruntled by his economic views, but

on the role of Congress, and on foreign policy, bull's eye.