Ron Paul on Tucker Carlsen 6/14/07

[Pharaoh]

Run time: 07:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIzP8ONtkv8   Posted on YouTube: June 14, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: June 15, 2007 By DU Member: Pharaoh Views on DU: 2340

 

[AX10]

1. A true conservative is not much better than a neo-conservative.

Paul is against national healthcare.

[Pawel K]

2. As great as his antiwar stance is he is wrong on every other issue

dont be fooled by him.

[bluestateguy]

3. MOST every other issue

He's pro-gun and against the government's ridiculous "War on Drugs".

[AX10]

4. I'd still vote for Hillary over him anyday!

[wtmusic]

5. Ron Paul is an idiot

happily chirping along with Tucker to the tune "Democrats Want A Big Bloated Government".

The cost of every government program advocated by Democrats in this session so far is dwarfed by the cost of the President's missteps. They're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill and they will--if we let them.

[AX10]

6. And it is beyond me why he gets so much support around here.

He's right on the war in Iraq, Civil Liberties and the drug war, otherwise he's a nut.

HILLARY IS BETTER THAN RON PAUL!!!! Understand?

[NobleCynic]

21. There is support for him because he is a poison pill

The more visibility he gets, the more it hurts the other GOP candidates. Believe you me, if anyone here actually thought he'd win, the support would dry up in an instant. He is a nut, but he is a nut that is severely embarassing the GOP frontrunners.

[LiberalLovinLug]

7. I seventh(?) that!

Ron Paul is wonderful surprise - a little gnat that will be great at buzzing around the Republican hopefuls, biting little chunks out of them, pestering them about their pro-war agendas. Generally being a nuisance and an annoying distraction to the GOP election machine. He came out of right field and yes his sane opinion on the futility of aggressive wars, is forcing the other contenders to react to it, making them look all the loonier.

But when I see "vote for Ron Paul" on progressive site's comment sections, which I do almost every day, I can't believe it. He is not even a traditional conservative, he's a libertarian conservative, which means he is even more against the uber-wealthy lifting a finger to help the disadvantaged of society. You won't see any kind of universal health care system - like every other western democracy enjoys. Privatize, privatize, and privatize. Leading to less and less mom & pop small businesses, and larger and larger conglomerated mega-corps, where citizens have less say about their own natural resources and freedom of choice, which all libertarians ironically foster.

[MirrorAshes]

10. Good post, and I agree

he is a great foil to the rest of the republican field, and having somebody talking something other than 9/11 fearmongering to the traditional conservative base is a good thing all-in-all. they need to be reminded of what their party used to be.

its kind of funny, really, that we as democrats are so used to fighting this unfair fight for so long that we don't know how to handle a republican who we merely disagree with on policy rather than the usual wingbat types we resent for all the election-stealing, warmongering, culture-of-corruption sponsoring, constitution-violating, etc.

I think he's in a great position right now. There is no way he could actually win the presidency, but he can ride his publicity wave undermining the rest of the repukes all the way to the primaries. its lovely.

[Sherman A1]

12. Agreed

I can find points to agree with the man and I do like him being the fly in the ointment for our Esteemed Friends of the GOP. That is in a sense the beauty of this campaign, lots of voices, lots of ideas, not all I agree with certainly, but a big field to pick ideas from and that is a good thing.

[Gregorian]

8. It's ironic that he's running for a government position considering his hatred of government.

He's a dangerous man.

And they didn't even get into privatization. But that's where all of his handraising was going.

How ridiculous it is to see him running for a position in something he loathes. Although I would argue he has to run in order to eliminate it.

[madfloridian]

9. His words about New Orleans today chilled me.

He really thinks FEMA would been a nuisance, and that government should stay out of emergency care.

He may be a "true conservative", if so it scares me. He is against social safety nets like Social Security. So much more.

[Sherman A1]

13. I understand your thoughts

but wasn't FEMA a nuisance in the case of New Orleans? At the very least they were bunglers.

[CGowen]

14. I don't understand how people can forget how FEMA made it worse on purpose

Let me give you just three quick examples. We had Wal-Mart deliver three trucks of water, trailer trucks of water. FEMA turned them back. They said we didn't need them. This was a week ago. FEMA--we had 1,000 gallons of diesel fuel on a Coast Guard vessel docked in my parish. The Coast Guard said, "Come get the fuel right away." When we got there with our trucks, they got a word. "FEMA says don't give you the fuel." Yesterday--yesterday--FEMA comes in and cuts all of our emergency communication lines. They cut them without notice. Our sheriff, Harry Lee, goes back in, he reconnects the line. He posts armed guards on our line and says, "No one is getting near these lines." Sheriff Harry Lee said that if America--American government would have responded like Wal-Mart has responded, we wouldn't be in this crisis.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9179790/


or an evil White House

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0704/S00338.htm

Greg Palast:
The other thing I found that they didn't like is that how did those people who were left in the water, how did they drown? And I discovered, talking to the head of the LSU, Louisiana State University Hurricane Center--the people running the hurricane evacuation--they told me, the Chief, a guy named Ivor van Heerden, had been holding this information to himself, he couldn't stand it any more, he said, "Someone's got to speak out. Let me lose my job." What he was saying is that George Bush's White House--he emphasised the "White House"; not just the government--the White House knew 20 hours or so before the levees burst that they were cracking apart and the city was gonna flood.

He was running the operation at the hurricane center in Lousiana, the state of Louisiana, and they stopped evacuating New Orleans. They were all congratulating each other. Katrina never hit the city, it went east of the city, so they were evacuating east. The White House didn't tell them that the levees were failing, and those things collapsed and 1500 people drowned. So people think it's bad; think that George Bush screwed up. It's worse than that. It's worse than that.

[bluestateguy]

19. His positions on social welfare issues are arguably worse than Bush

Bush has tried to corporatize and privatize some parts of the federal government, and he's staffed many government departments and agencies with incompetent boobs, but he has not really tried to actually cut government social programs. Ron Paul would take us back to a Gilded Age America with no social welfare safety net at all.

[The M Double]

11. His is right...

about Rudy.
& that idiot is the front runner...

[McCamy Taylor]

15. Paul represents a southern viewpoint that the Feds are an active NEGATIVE force.

In his world view, Bush and FEMA didn't simply sit back and do nothing while NOLA sank. They actively made NOLA's problems worse, in retaliation for the city being a Democratic stronghold, in an effort to turn Louisiana into a red state. In Paul's world view, the US makes things worse for Israel with its meddling. It makes things worse for Saudi Arabia. It makes things worse where ever it goes.

A lot of southern conservatives are very leery of the federal government. This is a hold over of Reconstruction. And when you are dealing with the Bush/Cheney federal government, it is a pretty damn accurate assessment.

Now, the flip side is when you have an administration that represents the people as opposed to Halliburton and Exxon, the federal government will step in and protect local citizens from civil rights and voting rights abuses. In Ron Paul's libertarian style government, you lose those protections, too. People are forced to seek seek safety in numbers. I.e. if you are an oppressed minority in the part of the country where you live, you have to move someplace where you are the majority. That is how all the Mormons ended up in Utah. So, in Ron Paul's version of democracy, you end up with a kind of feudalism.

[Dollface]

16. He is not an idiot, he is a libertarian and holds views consistent with that ideology.

I would never vote for him (well I might if it was between him and ... well, let's say any other candidate on the repub's roster) but am glad to see him pointing out the hypocrisy of the right's candidates and the threat they pose to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Also, I think he is spot on when it comes to Guilliani and the others and their willingness to use and abuse the powers put in place by the current criminal-in-chief and his minions.

On a separate note, did Tucker throw out all of his bow ties?

[ananda]

20. We need a secular social safety net.

Period.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

17. If I had to vote for a repuke

or have another repuke president in 2008, I'd rather it be Ron Paul than any of the others, because he believes in the Constitution. That being said, I agree with many here that he is important to us in that he makes the other repukes address his concerns. With so many Americans now against the war, he may pick up votes from dissatisfied conservatives, and who knows? He may skew a primary or two his way.

Of course, I won't vote for a repuke. I want Dennis Kucinich to be our next president, because he walks his talk and ACTS on his beliefs. I will settle for whoever gets the Democratic nomination. I shudder to think what will happen to our nation if the repukes remain in power--Paul is one who I think wouldn't become a dictator. I'm not so sure about the rest of them.

[Vincardog]

18. I do not believe in the same constitution he does. He believes that

the government has no business promoting the common good. If he does not believe the Government should do anything why does he want to be a part of it?

Katrina showed us what having a government lead by people who do not believe government should help people leads to. We end up with a Government hindering people who want to help and working against getting help to the people.

is short :puke: :puke: :spank: :spank: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:

[SeaBob]

22. Idiot

In my opinion I think Tucker carlson is the idiot. I think Ron Paul does represent what a Conservative republican is> all the others in the race are anything bu republican. I think democratic party should take his non-intervention, and anti war concepts to heart. I doubt he will be elected though. I would prefer John edwards