Ron Paul on House Floor: End the War in Afghanistan

[lyonspotter]

Run time: 08:07 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaiKEWwDgUY   Posted on YouTube: November 21, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: November 21, 2009 By DU Member: lyonspotter Views on DU: 2036

 
http://www.house.gov/paul
http://CampaignForLiberty.com

Congressman Ron Paul takes part in a 60 minute special order on the House floor about the continuing quagmire in Afghanistan, November 18, 2009.

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. "Campaign for Liberty"?

"Operation Health Freedom"?

Did you get lost on the route to libertarianunderground.com?

[lyonspotter]

2. Please address the video's content. NT

[Ruby the Liberal]

3. I don't disagree with Libertarian stances on the war

or auditing the fed.

I do take issue with you linking/promoting that site here as its main purpose is to derail health care reform.

[lyonspotter]

4. I usually copy and paste the content from the original source...

...and that is indeed the case again here.

Other threads on DU have dealt extensively with the subject of health care (lack of) reform. I don't wish to address it with you.

My concern - and the concern of the above video - is we have lost our way in regards to foreign policy, of which Obama continues that which Bush started.

Another great address on our wayward foreign policy by Paul: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9blADdpaiw8

[Cha]

8. Fuck ron paul.

[lyonspotter]

9. Is there seriously a need for that?

The man speaks a whole lot of truth, much like Grayson. We need more leaders who stand for a non-interventionist foreign policy and that will demand an end to the wars.

[The Northerner]

10. Partisan views?

I agree with Paul as well on foreign policy. He's even more non-interventionist than many Dems!

But, I think the problem is that too many people are trapped into believing in the two-party system that they'll automatically dismiss anyone who doesn't have a D next to their name regardless of the content.

[lyonspotter]

11. Darn right, you said it!...

People are more interested in 'their team' winning (whatever that means)... instead of truly thinking about what is right and what would be best for our country and world alike.

These wars are long, long overdue to come to a close. The two-party system has become an illusion for the powerful to carry forward a specific agenda right under our noses. E.g., Bush gets in, and the wars start. A Democratic president gets in, and the wars will continue forward, just as planned...but with expansion. A Republican may take over, again, from Obama, and this new president continues the violence. The true problem is the military industrial complex and the banks (FED). Paul exposes both. Grayson is after the Fed. We need more fearless individuals like this, because the Left-Right paradigm at this point appears to be, in the main, a farce.

[Turborama]

12. No, he's not like Grayson. That's a weaksauce argument trying to defend this libertarian racist

Ron Paul also thinks the 'free market' will solve all health care problems.

The only similarity Ron Paul and Alan Grayson have is that they are male human beings.

Don't believe me? Check out the replies to http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3752691">this thread and what he says about Remote Area Medical on http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x356893">this video.

[lyonspotter]

14. Oh?

So you have him on record making racist claims? Or do we all actually just have a proclivity to prejudgementality now by calling 'racist' anything that opposes our own view?

[billh58]

15. Yep, take a look

here:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/

here:

http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/01/09/ron-pauls-racist-newsletter-and-the-libertarians-that-excuse-it/

and, here:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/16/75159/9450

Ron Paul is also an anti-Semite, is a strong opponent of a woman's right to choose, and solidly against any form of Universal Healthcare for ALL Americans. He blames the US Government and its Affirmative Action programs for "racism" in the USA, but he and his kind exhibit blatant racism with repeated overt acts, such as his support for Don Imus, and the "nappy headed hoes" comment. Ron Paul agreed with Limpballs in saying that the women Imus referred to could "protect themselves," and therefore no one else had standing to criticize Imus under the First Amendment. IOW, Ron Paul believes that racist hate-speech is protected-speech.

Evidently, the anti-war crowd is willing to overlook Paul's blatant bigotry and racism, his anti-choice stance, his opposition to Healthcare for everyone, his lack of positive accomplishments, just because he is calling for an isolationist-policy end to war (and as pointed out in the Kos article: "for all the wrong reasons") in order to make political points. Paul also often denies that he has written what he wrote, or spoken what he spoke, so he's either a blatant liar or has serious mental problems. Ain't buyin' it, and neither do most thinking American Liberal Democrats. I can't speak for Greenies, "Independents," and those on the Far-Left, as those who subscribe to these labels seem to be looking for a political Messiah to lead them out of their self-imposed wilderness.

[lyonspotter]

17. "We can see what’s animating this little anti-semitic cunt. "

That's an excerpt from one of your links.

I'm supposed to take that sort of writing seriously?

[billh58]

18. What you choose

to take "seriously" is entirely up to you. The manner in which a proven anti-Semite is described by an observer does not alter the fact that the individual is a bigot. Ron Paul has made many anti-Semitic and racist statements, and they are all out there on the Internet to find -- if one is objective enough to look for them. That he denies having made those statements goes to another of his failings: a lack of honesty.

Somehow I suspect that those who worship Ron Paul for his anti-war stance are more than willing to overlook his anti-Semitism, his racism, his anti-choice position, his opposition to Universal Healthcare, and his other radical right-wing positions. FWIW, Paul is against involvement by the USA in war not because he thinks it is morally wrong, but because it is undertaken by government and costs the public huge amounts of money.

Ron Paul has stated that the American Civil War was a "war crime" perpetrated by a radical Northern "collectivist" government. Many believe that Ron Paul's hatred of Israel drives his opposition to US involvement in the ME. His racism and bigotry have already shown that he has no moral character, nor any amount of "love" for his fellow man.

You can agree with Ron Paul, and admire him, for any reason you wish, but you must accept the entire package. I'm certain that Hitler had admirers as well, but not too many of them were Jewish or non-white.

[lyonspotter]

19. No...

You presented an extremely unprofessional text that wreaks of bias, and then expect people who are unconvinced of your position to engage these biased and unprofessionally expressed ideas. Good luck, my friend. You don't know, nor do your sources know based on what they argued, the first thing about the inner thoughts of a man, but please...feel free to keep spewing mainstream as well as underground propaganda.

[billh58]

20. I realize that

the truth hurts deeply -- especially for ardent but misguided believers. Ron Paul followers are in a distinct minority in this country (as evidenced by his laughably low-numbers in both of his pathetic presidential bids).

That you would come on a Democratic site and attempt to promote a right-wing, anti-Semite, racist, Republican/Libertarian, is enough evidence for most of us here.

Calling me "biased" for calling out a racist and a bigot is hilarious. Do you write your own stuff, or do you get it directly from the Ron Paul website?

:kick:

[lyonspotter]

21. I don't promote Ron Paul's "right-wingedness"...

The video I posted here - a video of which you have not addressed in the slightest I might add! Thanks for the thread hijack - is a statement against war, a position "Democrats" like Obama used to support with "just words." I hoped for Kucinich, and he had laughably low numbers. Do you feel we should discard his opinions as well?

I am very much anti-interventionist, and in that sense, I line up with Ron Paul (as well as Kucinich). I don't have to agree with Ron Paul on all things political...just like I don't believe in partial-birth abortion or abortion in general, which I do not, yet I have voted in the main for democrats my entire life. Policies and politics are very complex because they seek to represent a life that is very complex, and I reserve the right to think for myself and do not have to agree with everything my party does, nor do I have to disagree with everything an opponent party does...

Your minimized view of politics and complexity of thought is in fact the real joke here. Do you support anything your party does without question? For that, my friend, is worth a laugh, a sublime one. You cannot possibly know what motivates a man, just as you cannot possibly know why Paul argues against war, only that he has argued against it. The fact that you immediately believe that his outspokenness against war is driven by immoral postures is yet another further joke. Again, your "evidence" of his racism is a joke, and any report that uses the word "cunt" is just strictly laughable.

[billh58]

24. Enjoy your

stay on DU, and good luck with promoting a Libertarian, racist, bigot who is also an anti-choice, anti-Universal Healthcare, right-wing asshole, on a Democratic and Progressive discussion board. One fucking anti-war YouTube video does not make up for Ron Paul's many moral shortcomings, regardless of how much you and he attempt to deny his documented public statements taken from his own newsletters:

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e., support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."

"Politically sensible blacks are outnumbered as decent people...I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city (Washington) are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."

"By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism."

I am finished arguing with you, and you may now have the last word bubba. Your support of Ron Paul AND his bigoted bullshit, coupled with your pompous and indignant defense of your own right-leaning postings on this thread, says volumes about you and your real purpose here. Your focus on, and obsession with, the use of the word "cunt" by an obscure poster on another blog says even more about you than it does about your defense of a bigoted racist. Something about protesting too much or too loudly?

Ta...;-)

[sellitman]

5. Agreed.

No reason for those links.

[billh58]

6. Ron Paul

is a Republican/Libertarian thug and neoconservative wolf in sheep's clothing, and does not deserve ANY links, or promotion, on DU.

[The Northerner]

7. Neocon?

I don't agree with all of Paul's views, but he has been opposed to every war post-WWII.

He's one of the staunchest non-interventionist politicians right now.

I also don't agree with all aspects of libertarianism but if there's one thing that libertarians and liberals, such as myself, concur on it's that the US should remain free of any foreign military interventionism.

[billh58]

13. Ron Paul is

a racist, an anti-Semitic, a strong anti-Women's Rights advocate, against Universal Healthcare, and he blames the United States for the 9/11 attacks carried out by Al Qaeda (with the assistance of the government of Afghanistan). Ron Paul is a proven liar, and I don't believe his "anti-neocon" blather any more than I believe any of his other bigoted right-wing bullshit. I sympathize with your anti-war, anti-military stance, and as a combat veteran I absolutely detest unnecessary war. Ron Paul, however, is more detestable to me than any "terrorist" that ever walked. Ron Paul is a "me first" Republican who rails against neoconservatives (for political gain) but supports their bigoted, racist, and divisive policies.

"Remaining free of any foreign military interventionism," however, is an extremely idealistic stance, and ignores the real world, and the very real monsters that exist in it. Our response to Afghanistan for the 9/11 attack on our soil by Al Qaeda with the support of the Taliban government was both necessary, and morally justified. Sadly, the neoconservative Republicans used it as an excuse to illegally invade Iraq, and failed our troops in their patriotic mission in Afghanistan by neglecting them in order to promote the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Perle/Wolfowitz PNAC agenda.

And lastly, there is absolutely NO logical way to compare Liberalism with Libertarianism -- they are two distinctly different, and opposing political ideologies. American Liberalism is a philosophy of compassion, the common welfare and defense, and the provision of a level playing field for all citizens. Libertarianism and Conservatism are rooted in a philosophy of survival-of-the-fittest along with a me-first, "trickle down" mentality, and are constantly looking for "loopholes" in the Constitution in order to subvert that founding document.

[Blue_Tires]

16. the proverbial broken clock....

[jakeXT]

22. Why are all the seats empty and why didn't he mention that the hijackers were trained on US bases?

[lyonspotter]

23. Yes, wish he would have not overlooked some of those details.

Do you believe that subject is only for the 9/11 truthers?