Like many people who have written about Ron Paul's presidential candidacy over the past two election cycles, I've been so impressed with the consistency and uniqueness of his paleoconservative philosophy that I've often overlooked the fact that, if he became president, his policy agenda would actually be pretty horrifying. I explore this in my new feature on 6 rights a President Ron Paul would take away. I know the Ron Paul movement is very net-savvy, so please do post any corrections that you feel are warranted under "Comments" below.
The increasing complexity of the conservative movement in the Tea Party era means that I need to look more carefully at where the contemporary Republican Party came from. Expect a series of biographies of early figures in the Religious Right, beginning with my short pieces on Paul Weyrich and Jerry Falwell.
I hope all of you have a wonderful 2012.
The increasing complexity of the conservative movement in the Tea Party era means that I need to look more carefully at where the contemporary Republican Party came from. Expect a series of biographies of early figures in the Religious Right, beginning with my short pieces on Paul Weyrich and Jerry Falwell.
I hope all of you have a wonderful 2012.
Comments
You have it essentially backwards, he would take away federal intrusions on those issues, not mandate a result.
Great job getting a gig writing for About.com. Unfortunately, you’re reaching so far on you assessments that they’re hardly worth going through one by one to discredit. Perhaps a class or two on how to read the kind of language you’re commenting on would help. Wow, just when I thought the media couldn’t be any dumber… oh, wait a second, you’re not the media. You’re just some guy who can’t get a real writing gig and still lives in mom’s basement.
So you are going to try to convince me with huge amounts of questionable legal opinions and interpretations that Ron Paul, the guy who is for individual liberty and wants to follow the constitution, will TAKE AWAY these 6 items at a STATE level, even though he is running for a federal office?
1. Your right to privacy.
2. Your right to have sex.
3. Your right to purchase and use birth control.
4. Your right to show a lack of respect to the U.S. flag.
5. Your right to exercise your own religious beliefs.
6. Your right to equal protection under the law.
Then you suggest that the other candidates are better choices? And you are a Civil Liberties guy? Do you support the patriot act? At the end of my comment, you act like you are against it. So how could you to tell me to vote for Michelle Bachman instead? She is all about the Patriot Act. Newt Gingrich want to strengthen it. So you are ok with the TSA? I’ll get more into your motivations later.
Then you have a whole paragraph with racist newsletter insults, and then claim that “this is an article about policy concerns”?
And you claim that you used to like Ron Paul but now have changed your mind? This is all for purposes self serving to you. It has nothing to do with the civil liberties you pretend to champion.
CONTINUED NEXT POST
Continued from above:
I have been posting comments on all the negative Ron Paul article comment boards, and I have yet to find a negative poster or writer who does not have some other personal agenda that leads them to their negativity. I wonder what your personal agenda is?
BINGO:
By reading some of your notes on the Mississippi Human Rights Report from way back in your heavily active days in 2009, I got my answer. You are one of those people whom is always right. AND you like to disagree with most people. You are what my father in law calls a ‘contrarian’. You seem to love to be smarter and better than anyone else in the room, and you attempt to prove this by adding tons of confusing details to your ideas that make people feel stupid. You also attempt to prove this by joining as many ‘I am a great person’ organizations as you can. If you really cared, you would just join one organization and focus on it and do it well. But no, you put your name on everything.
I love the Mumia Abu-Jamal comment. It fits what I am saying to a tee. You are a poser.
Bio shows this:
Tom Head is author of numerous books, including the recently-published Civil Liberties: A Beginner’s Guide (Oneworld, 2009). He is an officer in several Mississippi civil liberties organizations and maintains the Mississippi Human Rights Report, a blog dedicated to human rights and civil liberties issues in his home state.
Continued from above
Experience: Tom’s 24 nonfiction books include Freedom of Religion (Facts on Filed), The Bill of Rights (Greenhaven/Gale), What is the State of Human Rights? (Greenhaven/Gale), Is Torture Ever Justified? (Greenhaven/Gale). He is also author of the upcoming It’s Your World, So Change It: Using the Power of the Internet to Create Social Change (Que/Pearson), and co-author of the upcoming Crime and Punishment in America (Facts on File).
Tom is Mississippi NOW’s Vice-President for Legislation and Policy, secretary-treasurer of Jackson Area NOW, Jackson representative for Parents, Friends, and Families of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), director of communications for Unity Mississippi, and an active volunteer in the Mississippi ACLU, which in June 2006 awarded him a Certificate of Appreciation for his work. He also holds membership in Amnesty International, the Mississippi Hispanic Association, the Mississippi NAACP, and the Mississippi Immigrants’ Rights Alliance (MIRA).
Education: Tom holds an M.A. in humanities from California State University, Dominguez Hills (the same program from which Mumia Abu-Jamal graduated), and is a Ph.D. candidate in Edith Cowan University’s interdisciplinary studies program.
From Tom Head: Let’s explore the topic of civil liberties together. If you have a question, please always feel free to ask it. If you disagree with something I’ve written, please always feel free to say so. Let’s work together to build a better world, one where everybody is treated with dignity and respect.
Hey TOM HEAD, YEAH I DISAGREE with something you have written and HOW ABOUT YOU SHOW RON PAUL SOME DIGNITY AND RESPECT like you say above.
“His radical commitment to a state’s rights agenda has given him a Dixiecrat’s civil rights platform.” So you are against states rights? And like you are not a ‘radical’ yourself. Nice smear from a ACLU radical.
“He has worked against the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. So you don’t understand this sentence from Ron Paul, right from the link you provide: “Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.
the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Hey Tom, first, he voted against the re-authorization of this in 2006, again as your link shows. This is Ron Paul attempting to scale back more Federal Control as usual, which is his mandate. The voting right act as seen in 2006 represents an overreach of federal power and places unwarranted bureaucratic demands on Southern states that have long since abandoned the discriminatory practices the Act was meant to eradicate.
the application of Brown v. Board of Education. All he said on this is that nullification is something worth discussing. He is talking about nullifying federal laws. The Constitution is *NOT* federal law, it is separate from federal law.
“He has proposed amending the Constitution to retroactively strip citizenship from native-born Americans based on their parents’ immigration violations.” So you in favor of illegal immigrants illegally coming to the USA, then having children who get to be citizens? So the tax dollars of the minorities you act like you support should go to fund these people’s welfare and free education?
Tom Head, You don’t really sound like a Civil Libertarian to me. All you do is write articles and act like a know it all. From your own article here is why Ron Paul is a better man than you. He ran for office and championed all this. What have you done? Nothing, but attempt to undermine the only Liberty candidate on the ballot. Shame on you.
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE
Civil Liberty Pros of RON PAUL AS STATED BY TOM HEAD, BEFORE TOM DECIDED TO CHANGE HIS TUNE SO HE COULD SEEM better than the rest of us:
Criminal Justice:
•Believes tht the federal government has the authority to prosecute only three crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy. Believes that all other federal crime legislation should be revoked.
Death Penalty:
•Opposes capital punishment.
Drug War:
•Supports the abolition of all federal antidrug legislation.
•Has personally co-sponsored bills that would legalize medical marijuana and allow the use of industrial-grade hemp.
First Amendment:
•Believes that the Federal Communications Commission has no authority to regulate the content of broadcast communications.
Gun Rights:
•Strong supporter of the individual rights interpretation of the Second Amendment.
Lesbian and Gay Rights:
•Opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment.
•Believes that states that choose to recognize same-sex marriage should be allowed to do so without federal interference.
War on Terror:
•Consistent opponent of post-9/11 civil liberties abuses, in virtually every possible context.
•Voted against the PATRIOT Act.
Good Day Sir.
I found this comment interesting.I share it here with you.Ron Paul is a hero to me, an honourable and an honest man who sticks by his principles. If only we had a man like him in this country. The way the media in the US treats him makes me sick and they should be ashamed of themselves. Maybe they think the American people are stupid and will not see through their lies but I doubt it. There is a revolution going on in America and it inspires me and millions of people around the world who yearn for liberty, peace and a free society. God bless you Dr Paul, you are an inspiration to the world.- Chris Wardle, Wirksworth, England,It shows Ron Paul has opens the eyes of the world’.Americans the word is watching to see if you too can see through Mass media bias.To see if you really lead the world.Just do the right thing!Vote Ron Paul 2012!Do not let them tell you he cant win.You show them yes he can!
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/01/01/2890326/gop-field-has-broad-views-on-executive.html#storylink=cpy
This is such a ridiculous & flawed article that it is not even worth my time delineating it. Mr. Head, you are a complete fool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeAzrZCD65c&context=C32f1401ADOEgsToPDskJqH4IZFPk1GCJkJAn_AUCq
All this is pointless if you don’t exist. Obama has just made that possible by signing the NDAA. You no longer have the right to life, charge, trial or hearing. Just endless detention – and assassination if they like.
Get that fixed. Ron Paul wants to – Then come back to the evil that Ron Paul may cause (if any).
The presstututes are working overtime in their efforts to marginalize, mock and smear Ron Paul. They are in full panic mode, and they have the anti-Paul propaganda machine running in overdrive.
Please help Ron Paul counter-punch the attackers by donating to the Ron Paul money bomb. Visit his official website: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/
Let’s make this a truly Happy New Year by supporting the only man who will really change anything in Washington.
My 16 year old grandson has combed through the lies about Ron Paul, so please educate yourself a bit.
Don’t think for one second you can change my vote.
Ron Paul 2012!
Mr. Head, the claims laid out in your article are entirely counter-factual and baseless. This piece is an insult to journalism, politics, and most importantly to Liberty. It is a shame that the ACLU has actually associated with ignorant people like you.
I live in Australia and i’d give my right arm to have Dr Paul here. I wasn’t one bit interested in politics until i stumbled upon Ron Paul around 10 years ago. I wish him and his voters all the very best for the upcoming election.
Ron Paul is not, and never was, a civil libertarian. He’s a states’ rights extremist and 10th Amendment purist who talks a good game at the federal level but whose policies would ultimately result in the stuff of nightmares. Literally. Theocratic leadership schemas in most Southern and Western States, collapse of banks and medical systems, widespread homelessness and starvation. We’re on the verge of these things already, removing all federal oversight will just tip the balance. Yikes.
I urge people to watch this short video clip with Ron Paul answering a question on “why won’t he come out on the truth about 9/11″. It is astonishing and it makes a rational observer conclude that Ron Paul indeed is a truther. Watch for yourselves: http://youtu.be/3u0tgNUfOL8
Tom
I have been reading your newsletters for years and this is the first time you have been totally wrong and I know members of the ACLU who see him as the best civil libertarian to run for president since Abraham Lincoln.
And I am hoping for debates this fall between the Constitutional scholar who is our president and Dr. Paul who is the finest Constitutional Conservative who I have ever had the pleasure to vote for. (twice) The debates might be boring for the media talking heads but ordinary Americans will come out winners at the end!
The rest of the republican choices are threats to our Constitution. Some of them have already promised they will ignore it.
Ron Pauls biggest issue is ending undeclared wars and making the ordinary man and woman on the streets more free.
Please look up what he said he would do first if he was ever elected way back when he run as a Libertarian. Nothing in his message has changed. He is the most honest man who has ever run for president!
Tom, I appreciate your enumerating your concerns about a Ron Paul presidency, but I just want to give my two cents.
First of all, in 1. Your right to privacy, we see how Ron Paul wants the Supreme Court to stick to their constitutional limits in judging the law and not attempt to legislate, which is Congress’ job. In all other points made in your article, we see how Paul is attempting a return to states’ rights. For too long, the federal government has driven its agenda down the throats of the states, robbing them of their autonomy simply because it has the power and tax money to do so. You see this as a take-away, because some states are very conservative and would impose laws upon its citizens that seem contrary to individual liberty. However, on the flip side of the coin, we have those states that have liberalized drug policy, but have been strong-armed by the federal government and its agencies in direct opposition to what the citizens of those states want.
As for the “racist” newsletters, Paul has said that he was not aware of these articles. But we know that there are problems within the black community that only the black community can solve. Pretending these don’t exist or expecting the federal government to step in and legislate these problems away is not the answer. I am willing to give Ron Paul the benefit of the doubt.
Ron Paul is not against freedom; He is against an all powerful federal government that is not acting within the constraints of the Constitution, and that uses force to bend all of us to its agenda, as wrong-headed as it might be.
“as wrong-headed as it might be.”
I fear that this phrase in my post might be misconstrued. I am referring to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT being wrong-headed here and not to Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is right on, and he is the best candidate we have for restoring the individual liberties that we have lost to the federal government and the American Republic that has been sold out to the American Empire.
My friends:
Thank you for your helpful comments. I’ll be following up in a blog entry later today, I think.
I am sure that most people who support Ron Paul do so for good and valid reasons, but as a lifelong Mississippi resident I cannot in good conscience overlook the profound civil liberties implications of a president’s decision not to enforce federal civil rights laws, or of appointing Supreme Court justices who will seek to overturn federal civil rights precedents. This is not a matter that states have historically handled in a responsible manner, in part because many states (including mine) do not have an independent judiciary.
Tom, stick to your guns. I am pleased with all the commenters and their respect for the Constitution, but I wish they’d read it for comprehension instead of just picking and choosing the parts they like and then hammering the rest of us with those.
If I wanted to live in a theocracy, I’d move to Iran. It boggles my mind to find that so many Christians have even less comprehension of the Bible than they do of the Constitution. Perhaps if they took the time to read the Gospels, they’d find that Jesus never said a lot, but what He said about loving your neighbor, healing the sick and taking care of the needy makes Him look suspiciously like a socialist. That doesn’t fit too well with the gospel of greed and hate that is practiced today.
In conclusion, I’m ten years younger than Dr. Paul, and white, but I remember the days of segregation well, and I can figure out without a program that if you despise Brown v Board, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, you’re not a great defender of the 10th Amendment…you are a bigot.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but I’ve never thought of you as a “libertarian” so your opinion doesn’t matter much.
Ron Paul 2012!
Why do people still promote the concept that the President is capable of giving or taking away things from the people of this country? Maybe I need to reread the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but if I’m not mistaken, Congress, not the President, is in control of creating and approving laws. Yes, the President gets to sign off on it, but the majority of the process regarding a bill becoming a law happens in Congress.
Every time a Presidential election comes around, I get sick to my stomach at the amount of people who actually place such a huge emphasis on the Presidential election, but give you a black stare when you start talking about potential Senators or Representatives.
Then after a President is elected, the political party that lost complains for the next four years because Bush or Obama or Joe Blow is “ruining this country”. You tell these people that the President isn’t the problem, Congress is the problem, and once again, they look at you with a blank stare.
That brings me to another point. Congress is supposed to represent the people; however, they typically vote on party lines. How does that work? In my experience, though people may affiliate with a specific party, they don’t usually view individual laws through party affiliation “beer goggles” first.
This is at least the third time I’ve received an email telling me how “horrifying” the libertarian Ron Paul would be as a president, from someone who considers himself libertarian.
Aside from Gary Johnson, Ron Paul is THE most libertarian candidate currently running for office, and he’s certainly the only candidate with a chance of being elected.
I don’t know who’s paying you to write this nonsense, but I’m unsubscribing from your emails as of today.
Glenn – I think his point is that Ron Paul would allow states to make and enforce those laws if they so choose to. That’s not really individual liberty. Letting the states make any laws they want to, especially with how law politics and interest groups work at the state levels, this is def not an ideal situation and could lead to the laws he was stating. If you happen to live in a conservative state.