2008 Woodie Awards
Paul conscientious, honest in actions
Matthew Hutt
Issue date: 11/29/07 Section: Opinions
I must respectfully disagree with Daniel Potter in his latest attempt to persuade readers with his political insight ["Ron Paul unusual, unfavorable" Nov. 19].
The Ron Paul supporters with whom I speak know full well what Dr. Paul's campaign platform is. Granted, they may not have been alive when he began his service in the House of Representatives, but they have read up on his goals and ideas, and I would assume they know more about their candidate than any other supporter for any other presidential candidate.
Anyone who has followed Paul's voting record for any length of time knows that he first consults the U.S. Constitution before voting in favor of or against any piece of legislation. If it isn't allowed in the Constitution, then Paul does not vote for it. Pretty simple.
Potter's concern seems to be with the elimination of "all manner of [federal] government agencies," many of which did not exist prior to the 20th century. What Potter may have forgotten is something known as the Tenth Amendment, which leaves powers not delegated to the federal government up to the states.
Potter crows about Paul's dedication to limiting government "where it interferes with the free market," but I would assert that Paul strives to limit government wherever it is. "That government governs best, which governs least." Thomas Jefferson saw the light - why can't modern day politicians and political pundits do the same?
Potter's concern with riot police would be spot-on if Paul advocated a police state. Quite the opposite, however, Congressman Paul routinely votes against government intrusion into the lives of its citizens. He voted against the USA PATRIOT Act and domestic wiretapping.
Potter also ignores Paul's foresight in endorsing Ronald Reagan in 1976. I certainly wouldn't have endorsed George W. Bush in 2004 just because he was the incumbent. Potter seems to forget the primary system of voting that exists here in America.
At first Paul's opposition to the War in Iraq disturbed me, but then I looked back at my first opinion column in The Blackman Voice. I originally voiced opposition to the war because it was liberal interventionism and nation building - no conservative would support that idea. I was labeled "anti-American" and "unpatriotic."
In fact, Republicans in Congress voted against funding for the situation in Kosovo in the late 1990s. Who complained then?
Not to digress, but my favorite anti-war group are the "out of Iraq, into Darfur" folks - like pulling us out of one quagmire and putting us into another will solve the problem. Like a good Lifetime movie, it's all the same plot, just different names.
Those "key facets" Potter expounds upon are not lost to Paul's supporters. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" are ideals with which we agree. People should be allowed to live their lives without government intrusion.
We shouldn't have to work until May every year to pay off the federal government. Social programs should be cut, allowing only those who truly need them to receive them.
Ron Paul exhibits qualities of an early American: a self-made, hard-working individual who strives to make his life and the lives of those around him better. Henry David Thoreau wrote about men like Paul in his essay "Self Reliance," which everyone should read.
Mark Twain once said, "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man: brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
Maybe Potter's waiting for his patriotism to be free.
Matthew Hurtt is a junior liberal arts major, and can be reached at Matt.Hurtt@gmail.com
The Ron Paul supporters with whom I speak know full well what Dr. Paul's campaign platform is. Granted, they may not have been alive when he began his service in the House of Representatives, but they have read up on his goals and ideas, and I would assume they know more about their candidate than any other supporter for any other presidential candidate.
Anyone who has followed Paul's voting record for any length of time knows that he first consults the U.S. Constitution before voting in favor of or against any piece of legislation. If it isn't allowed in the Constitution, then Paul does not vote for it. Pretty simple.
Potter's concern seems to be with the elimination of "all manner of [federal] government agencies," many of which did not exist prior to the 20th century. What Potter may have forgotten is something known as the Tenth Amendment, which leaves powers not delegated to the federal government up to the states.
Potter crows about Paul's dedication to limiting government "where it interferes with the free market," but I would assert that Paul strives to limit government wherever it is. "That government governs best, which governs least." Thomas Jefferson saw the light - why can't modern day politicians and political pundits do the same?
Potter's concern with riot police would be spot-on if Paul advocated a police state. Quite the opposite, however, Congressman Paul routinely votes against government intrusion into the lives of its citizens. He voted against the USA PATRIOT Act and domestic wiretapping.
Potter also ignores Paul's foresight in endorsing Ronald Reagan in 1976. I certainly wouldn't have endorsed George W. Bush in 2004 just because he was the incumbent. Potter seems to forget the primary system of voting that exists here in America.
At first Paul's opposition to the War in Iraq disturbed me, but then I looked back at my first opinion column in The Blackman Voice. I originally voiced opposition to the war because it was liberal interventionism and nation building - no conservative would support that idea. I was labeled "anti-American" and "unpatriotic."
In fact, Republicans in Congress voted against funding for the situation in Kosovo in the late 1990s. Who complained then?
Not to digress, but my favorite anti-war group are the "out of Iraq, into Darfur" folks - like pulling us out of one quagmire and putting us into another will solve the problem. Like a good Lifetime movie, it's all the same plot, just different names.
Those "key facets" Potter expounds upon are not lost to Paul's supporters. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" are ideals with which we agree. People should be allowed to live their lives without government intrusion.
We shouldn't have to work until May every year to pay off the federal government. Social programs should be cut, allowing only those who truly need them to receive them.
Ron Paul exhibits qualities of an early American: a self-made, hard-working individual who strives to make his life and the lives of those around him better. Henry David Thoreau wrote about men like Paul in his essay "Self Reliance," which everyone should read.
Mark Twain once said, "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man: brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
Maybe Potter's waiting for his patriotism to be free.
Matthew Hurtt is a junior liberal arts major, and can be reached at Matt.Hurtt@gmail.com
Viewing Comments 1 - 9 of 15
Duane
posted 11/29/07 @ 9:29 AM CST
Thanks for being fair to Dr. Paul as it seems like that is a hard thing to do for a lot of journalists.
matthew
posted 11/29/07 @ 9:54 AM CST
"In fact, Republicans in Congress voted against funding for the situation in Kosovo in the late 1990s. Who complained then?
Not to digress, but my favorite anti-war group are the "out of Iraq, into Darfur" folks - like pulling us out of one quagmire and putting us into another will solve the problem. (Continued…)
Brad
posted 11/29/07 @ 2:59 PM CST
Core Character Counts !!!
I vote for Ron Paul because he demonstrates Root Cause and Corrective Action skills as well as a "Does What He Says He Is Going To Do" record. (Continued…)
Reason over religion!
posted 11/29/07 @ 6:38 PM CST
So, at first you were disturbed by Ron Paul's opposition to the Iraq invasion. (I am going to infer from that that you supported the invasion at that point). (Continued…)
Dancing Bear
posted 11/29/07 @ 10:32 PM CST
"Social programs should be cut, allowing only those who truly need them to receive them."
Yeah like let's dump the military industrial complex off the public dole. (Continued…)
Dancing Bear
posted 11/29/07 @ 10:38 PM CST
One other thing--
"We shouldn't have to work until May every year to pay off the federal government. "
Oh why not? Take a look around. You're getting a bargain. (Continued…)
blogcruiser
posted 12/01/07 @ 4:01 PM CST
Thank you for the thought out article it was a good read.
Read the Constitution, Ron Paul
posted 12/03/07 @ 12:14 AM CST
From http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U. (Continued…)
Alex Blackwelder
posted 12/05/07 @ 11:56 PM CST
Not only did I accidently post twice, I wrote Appealments and not repeallments. Whoops. :D
Post a Comment