Julian Assange falls for the Paul hype

In relation to Rand Paul… well, I’m a big admirer of Ron Paul and Rand Paul for their very principled positions in the US Congress on a number of issues. They have been the strongest supporters with the fight against the US attack on Wikileaks and on me in the US Congress.

Similarly they have been the strongest opponents of drone warfare and extrajudicial executions. And so, that’s quite an interesting phenomenon in the United States. The position of the libertarian Republican… coming to a position of non-violence which is the American Libertarian tradition.

Julian Assange

Leading United States Senate candidate Rand Paul today criticized the Obama administration’s decision to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center and try terrorism suspects in United States Civil Courts.

“Foreign terrorists do not deserve the protections of our Constitution,” said Dr. Paul. “These thugs should stand before military tribunals and be kept off American soil. I will always fight to keep Kentucky safe and that starts with cracking down on our enemies.”

Dr. Paul believes in strong national defense and thinks military spending should be our country’s top budget priority. He has also called for a Constitutional declaration of war with Afghanistan.

Rand Paul

“I have never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an act of crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”

Rand Paul

Dodging issues the Ron Paul way

I’ve come to realize that Ron Paul’s rhetorical positioning is extremely clever, in that it allows him to appeal to both sides of many issues. To put it another way, he is able to take a theoretical stand against bad things while advocating policies that would lead directly to them.

Consider racism, for example. Ron Paul believes that the Civil Rights Act should never have been passed. He thinks that companies and individuals should be free to be as racist as they like. Want to post a “No blacks need apply” sign? He thinks you should have the freedom to do that. And yet, at the same time, Ron Paul states clearly that he personally thinks that racism is a bad thing. It’s very unfair, no doubt about it. It’s just that he feels that we should wait until everyone voluntarily decides to stop being racist, rather than passing laws. It’s regrettable that giving people the freedom to be racist would result in a lot of racism, but what are you going to do, eh? It’s just human nature.

So his liberal supporters get to point at his statements against racism; and his neo-Nazi supporters at Stormfront get to point at his statements against the Civil Rights Act and his desire to repeal laws against discrimination. And he gets to shrug, grin, and dodge the issue.

Well, I think this is an ingenious position. Why don’t we try it with some other laws?

Sure, theft is bad. But we shouldn’t have big government forcing people to stop thieving. Instead, we should patiently wait until everyone voluntarily decides to stop. In fact, it’s the statists who cause theft with their legislation, dividing people into “have” and “have not”, “owner” and “not owner”, and leading to people’s obsession with property, right? But you know, theft is really really bad. Making it legal shouldn’t in any way be seen as condoning it, OK?

Wrong Paul

With the current focus on Ron Paul’s newsletters and his claim that he was unaware of their content or did not approve of it (yeah, right), I thought it would be educational to take a look at quotes from articles explicitly written by Ron Paul himself.

Ron Paul defends a gay person’s freedom — unless it’s the freedom to get married, in which case he thinks federal interference in your personal life is just fine:

“If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state.” — Ron Paul, article on the Federal Marriage Amendment

Ron Paul supports state governments in their attempts to criminalize sex acts between consenting adults, saying that the state has the right to enforce sodomy laws:

“The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights — rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.” — Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution

Ron Paul is strongly anti-abortion:

“I am strongly pro-life. I think one of the most disastrous rulings of this century was Roe versus Wade. I do believe in the slippery slope theory. I believe that if people are careless and casual about life at the beginning of life, we will be careless and casual about life at the end. Abortion leads to euthanasia. I believe that.” — Ron Paul, speech to Congress

Ron Paul believes government should actively promote religious beliefs:

“The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers.” — Ron Paul, ‘The War On Religion’

As for the Civil Rights Act, that was a bad thing, because the right to post “No coloreds need apply” signs and run whites-only businesses and clubs was infringed:

“However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. […] The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society.” — Ron Paul, ‘The Trouble With the ’64 Civil Rights Act’

In fact, Ron Paul goes further, claiming that people who attempt to promote diversity within organizations are the true promoters of racism:

“By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups.” — Ron Paul, ‘What Really Divides Us?’

Got any more good ones?

The Ron Paul Theocracy Party

"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers." — Ron Paul.

"The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries. […] The U.S. Constitution established a Republic rooted in Biblical law, administered by representatives who are Constitutionally elected by the citizens." — "Constitution" Party platform.

More Ron Paul facts

Ron Paul will make the IRS deductible.

When Ron Paul tables a motion, it stays tabled.

Ron Paul’s farts can defeat any filibuster.

Ron Paul will disband NATO and defend America in hand-to-hand combat.

Ron Paul doesn’t believe in separation of church and state, because god is always asking him for advice.

As a gynecologist, Ron Paul learned how to make aborted fetuses spontaneously gestate in his bare hands.