You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Paul to US govt.: Mind your own business
2011-12-22
[Iran Press TV] US Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has lashed out at Washington's engagement in 'perpetual war,' calling on the US administration to mind its 'own business.'

"Perpetual war is bankrupting our country," the Texan congressman told a gathering of his supporters in the midwestern US state of Iowa on Wednesday.

"Every year we spend more and more money overseas," he noted, saying Washington's increasing expenditures in areas, including "intervention, propping up dictators, fighting wars that we don't need to be fighting" acted as a drain on the national budget.

Opposing the US government's undue interference in the economy as well as its military interventions abroad, Paul has pushed his way to the top place in Iowa caucuses, according to recent polls conducted by RealClearPolitics.com, a website, which tracks the US politics.

Washington and some of its allied states invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 and Iraq in March 2003.

The US has reportedly spent over USD 1,100-plus billion in taxpayer money on the war in Iraq, while some experts estimate that the indirect costs of the campaign, such as interest on additional debt, will exceed the direct costs.

The respected Nobel-Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard Professor Linda Bilmes wrote in a 2008 book that the combined costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has stood at between USD 5 and USD 7 trillion.

Paul has also rejected the US and its allies' allegations against Iran about the Iranian nuclear program and warned against any military confrontation with the Islamic Theocratic Republic.

"Iran doesn't have a bomb. There's no proof... And for us to overreact and to talk about bombing Iran, that's much more dangerous," he said in an interview with CBS television's 'Face the Nation' on November 20.

The United States, Israel, and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program and have used this pretext to push for the imposition of sanctions on the Islamic Theocratic Republic as well as to call for a military attack on the country.

Iran, however, maintains that, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the IAEA, it has every right to develop and acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

The IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities, but has never found any evidence of diversion in Iran's civilian nuclear program.
Posted by:Fred

#27  He ain't perfect but we need someone who really believes in affordable government.

And he'll make the trains run on time as well!
Posted by: Pappy   2011-12-22 22:08  

#26  Put me down as a Paulite due to my Jeffersonian slant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffersonian_democracy

He ain't perfect but we need someone who really believes in affordable government.
Posted by: BrerRabbit   2011-12-22 18:43  

#25  I'm firmly of the belief that the wider communism spread the less sustainable it is, but it's rather important to oppose it, as it's like a fast spreading metastatic cancer will kill it's host faster.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2011-12-22 17:44  

#24  No. An aggressive Ronsolationist policy would have had the US troops, equipment, and monies out of NATO very quickly, leaving something quite different than what we grew up with. Of course that also means no Bay of Pigs invasion, so perhaps you are right that Cuba would not need Soviet nukes as Communism spreads unchecked into the West Indies and Central America, and around the world.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2011-12-22 17:30  

#23  Ron Paul Funny or die.
Posted by: newc   2011-12-22 16:14  

#22  he believes it - he's also an anti-semitic nutcase.
Posted by: Frank G   2011-12-22 15:04  

#21  and then Cuba's nukes and Turkey's nukes would've been swapped away with less sabre rattling...
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2011-12-22 14:53  

#20  I agree with EU6305, he believes what he is saying.

His statement about JFK calling Kruschev remove nukes from Cuba was absurd to the point of a willing lie, and disregards his own sales pitch on account of sanctions were put in place against Cuba in the form of a naval blockade. Not that it matters, because if he had been president at the time and stuck to his beliefs, he would not have known Cuba had nukes until Castro said so.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2011-12-22 14:45  

#19  Sometimes I believe that Ron Paul tells the truth as he sees it. He just doesn't see very well.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2011-12-22 12:56  

#18  I'm a Palinista, doesn't matter, fly over votes don't count.
Posted by: bman   2011-12-22 12:33  

#17  As in Calvin and Hobbes, Pappy?
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2011-12-22 12:19  

#16  And I'm a Pollyanna...except for being an orphan and breaking my back in a fall.
Posted by: trailing wife   2011-12-22 11:58  

#15  I used to be a Randite---when I was 15.

I'm still a Hobbesian.
Posted by: Pappy   2011-12-22 11:51  

#14  Hey rjschwarz I used to be a Randite---when I was 15.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2011-12-22 11:42  

#13  He's been consisten in his views for years. You would know what you were going to get if he were elected. That would be a benefit. Some of his views do not compute in my book, but what the hell do I know anyway? I do know that we have been in two wars for WAY too long and they have cost us an amount of money that the human mind cannot even comprehend. We squander billions on tin pot dictators and wall street a-holes that could easily go toward our own people and developement. Remember also that presidents promise alot, but rarely deliver much.
Posted by: bigjim-CA   2011-12-22 11:28  

#12  g(r)omgoru, I would amend that to be Libertarians with a capital L.

in the US there area a large number of small l libertarians who are not so dogmatic and make the distinction with the small l. A nice definition can be found here

"A Big L Libertarian is a being of exceptional ideological purity who builds magnificent theoretical constructs from that ideology. He then not only moves into that theoretical construct, but insists that we all move in too.

A small L libertarian admires the exceptional purity of the ideology and the beauty of the theoretical construct, but insists on living in the real world."

Paul is definitely a Big L libertarian. All theory, minimal reality.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2011-12-22 11:26  

#11  Faith in miners to run the currency is just as unwise as faith in a bunch of academics.

However both will have an impossible time when you tax (income, investment, sales, saving and other transfers) and subsidise (land, patents, copyright) the wrong the wrong things.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2011-12-22 11:14  

#10  That libertarians as just as dogmatic as Marxists, is hardly news.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2011-12-22 10:52  

#9  Economics is always based on faith - faith in gold just tend to be a bit stronger than faith in government-emitted currency.
Posted by: Glenmore   2011-12-22 10:52  

#8  Ron Paul is VERY wrong economically (gold has just as many/more problems as fiat currency), and very naive militarily (if we don't threaten you, you won't threaten us is proven false everywhere or "power vacuums don't produce peace").
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2011-12-22 10:26  

#7  http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/286259/paul-fringe-frontrunner-rich-lowry

Posted by: mom   2011-12-22 10:21  

#6  a sincere politician
Another great oxymoron.
Posted by: Glenmore   2011-12-22 09:26  

#5  A Nobel Prize winning Economist?

A Harvard Professor?

Those are not stellar recommendations to me.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2011-12-22 03:07  

#4  Ron Paul can't compute JIHAD.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2011-12-22 02:11  

#3  See also WORLD NEWS > RON PAUL: ATTACK ON IRAN WOULD BE REPEAT OF "USELESS" IRAQ WAR.

Ronnie may be in agreement wid BOB KOEHLER???
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2011-12-22 00:47  

#2  Ron Paul is a sincere politician. Meaning whatever sincerity passes over his lips is framed first and foremost by his need for approval and power.

All politicians are thus and expecting different from them is insanity, yet we do it every election cycle and play as if any of these clowns will ever act accountably.

If we continue to send people off to Washington where they are away and unaccountable to their neighbors we will continue to see these same results. Technology now absolutely allows for in district lives for Congresscritters.

Let's use the internet for what DARPA built it for, remote voting for Congress. Let them telecommute their asses to committees and otherwise work remotely like hundreds of thousands of their fellow Americans do everyday.

Let them look into the eyes of their neighbors everyday instead of living to play the Washington game.

Accountability is a daily thing, and lobbyists get that and haunt around congressional offices; that is why the people with enough resources to hire lobbyists rule the world if not the lobbyists themselves.
Posted by: Ominous1   2011-12-22 00:45  

#1  How bout a Rantburg poll? Is Ron Paul

On the up and up?

A sick, treacherous bastard?

Something else entirely?
Posted by: M. Murcek   2011-12-22 00:18  

00:00