Another good Ron Paul rant (but this one isn’t from me)
by Arlen Parsa
Prose Before Hos has this to say on Ron Paul. Edit Here’s part of it (click the link to read the full item)-
On sites such as digg and reddit there is an overwhelming amount of support for Ron Paul that equates to nothing more than a small branch of loud mouth aggressive braggarts that are pushing a libertarian further than he deserves to go. Mr. Paul’s supporters are pushing to drown out any criticism of his campaign. His supporters have waged an online campaign of omission to keep contradictory data out of common use thus implying that Ron Paul is a better candidate than he really is. No matter what rationale is used to point out the flaws of Ron Paul someone always comes back with a justification. If you criticize his position in online polls as false, his fund raising in New Hampshire is brought up. But if you then use fund raising on a national level as your benchmark you’re criticized for turning politics into an exclusionary money race. For Ron Paul supporters there is no acceptable way to bring counterpoints to his campaign. Any attempt to show his campaign as unelectable elicits a petulant howl from all the politico crybabies that want their darling boy to win. This is nothing short of an act of propaganda. Internet trolls spam websites to drown out everything except when Ron Paul belts out another clever sound bite. There is no excuse for a campaign that quietly accepts such behavior from it’s supporters, Ron Paul accepts the actions of an internet gang to protect his image online. By not actively opposing this behavior he supports it.
Mr. Paul runs as a former libertarian outsider, but he has served 9 terms in congress, and only as a Republican. Mr. Paul stated in a CNN debate that “Roe vs Wade ruined it for everyoneâ€. Mr. Paul voted against allowing adoption amongst non-married non-related couples (i.e. homosexual couples). Mr. Paul did not vote for the Iraq war, but voted for unchecked military retaliation after 9/11. This is not the platform of an enlightened conservative. This is the platform of a traditional Republican that draws more influence from the bible than the reality of his surroundings. Mr. Paul consistently votes against legislation that supports contraceptives and abortions. Mr. Paul voted against background checks at gun shows (now an easily exploited loophole to get guns fast and unmonitored). Mr. Paul has voted in line with the interests of the John Birch Society since 2004. This man is not the best candidate for the presidency and it’s time that the truth about it came out. In the first paragraph of his “about†page he buys into the standard Republican rhetoric of being a champion of “freedomâ€. The rest of his about page continues with a cascade of buzzwords that attempts to do nothing more than make you think he’s a swell guy.
I’ve been writing about this type of thing for a while now. See the following posts:
- A progressive viewpoint on Ron Paul
- Racism in Ron Paul’s past writings?
The Daily Background

Hi, I’m the original author of this story.
I’m really glad that you like it and have posted it here. I noticed you haven’t used the text in full though. I don’t mind either way, but I ask that you would please not where you have left out content.
Thank you for considering my request,
~C
not should be note. Sorry about the typo.
If you don’t do any research to back up your points, of if you purposefully post misleading information, don’t be surprised if Paul’s supporters come on and make corrections.
He’s against the federal government having any say in gay adoption, marriage, abortion, and what goes on in gun shows. This doesn’t mean he doesn’t support the votes that you mentioned, but just doesn’t want the feds to have any say in it. This is because of the simple fact that the federal government has no legal authority to rule on those matters. Unconstitutional federal rulings usurp power from states, counties, etc.
If he doesn’t support the federal government having a role in deciding civil rights issues like equal rights for gay people, then would he have supported the federal government deciding other civil rights issues– like the Voting Rights Act and other crucial equality legislation during the civil rights movement?