Democrats can learn a lesson from Ron Paul

[WileEcoyote]

OK I think the guy is half full of bull OK? A libertarian policy will always fail. Unleashes corporate greed while getting rid of the safety net for hard working Americans.

However Congressman Paul is keeping a simple simple message: "End The War".

From: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071106/ap_po/paul_fundraising

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, aided by an extraordinary outpouring of Internet support Monday, hauled in more than $3.5 million in 20 hours.

Paul, the Texas congressman with a Libertarian tilt and an out-of-Iraq pitch, entered heady fund raising territory with a surge of Web-based giving tied to the commemoration of Guy Fawkes Day.



What this means is what we already know: The American people will support a candidate who bucks his mates in Congress and obeys the will of the people to end the war.

Again: He's a more decent man than his GOP peers but still with a failed economic policy philosophy. If he were to get elected my guess is he would not be able to jettison the whole structure of public commons (social security, national parks, banking regulation) that the Libertarian ideology promotes.

Prediction: Ron Paul may destroy Rudy Guiliani in the early primaries. That is if he can get enough independents to vote on his GOP ballot. Sometimes confusing which states allow independents to vote on party primaries or not.

My hope is that Paul gains more votes from the GOP moderates and brings younger people to the polls. This will prove pivotal at getting weak kneed Dems to start showing some backbone. They'll have to in order to remain competitive in future elections.

Won't mention names but a Senator from California comes to mind first. Another two from New York could also more spine...

[Mojorabbit]

1. I like his bill

and don't understand why we are not seeing Dems do this. Here is part of it. This should be a bipartisan effort.http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-3835

(a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Unchecked power by any branch leads to oppressive transgressions on individual freedoms and ill-considered government policies.

(2) The Founding Fathers enshrined checks and balances in the Constitution to protect against government abuses to derail ill-conceived domestic or foreign endeavors.

(3) Checks and balances make the Nation safer by preventing abuses that would be exploited by Al Qaeda to boost terrorist recruitment, would deter foreign governments from cooperating in defeating international terrorism, and would make the American people reluctant to support aggressive counter-terrorism measures.

(4) Checks and balances have withered since 9/11 and an alarming concentration of power has been accumulated in the presidency based on hyper-inflated fears of international terrorism and a desire permanently to alter the equilibrium of power between the three branches of government.

(5) The unprecedented constitutional powers claimed by the President since 9/11 subtracted national security and have been asserted for non-national security purposes.

(6) Experience demonstrates that global terrorism can be thwarted, deterred, and punished through muscular application of law enforcement measures and prosecutions in Federal civilian courts in lieu of military commissions or military law.

(7) Congressional oversight of the executive branch is necessary to prevent secret government, which undermines self-government and invites lawlessness and maladministration.

(8) The post-9/11 challenges to checks and balances are unique in the Nation's history because the war on global terrorism has no discernable end.

(b) Purpose- The American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 is intended to restore the Constitution's checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

SEC. 3. MILITARY COMMISSIONS; ENEMY COMBATANTS; HABEAS CORPUS.

(a) The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is hereby repealed.

(b) The President is authorized to establish military commissions for the trial of war crimes only in places of active hostilities against the United States where an immediate trial is necessary to preserve fresh evidence or to prevent local anarchy.

(c) The President is prohibited from detaining any individual indefinitely as an unlawful enemy combatant absent proof by substantial evidence that the individual has directly engaged in active hostilities against the United States, provided that no United States citizen shall be detained as an unlawful enemy combatant.

(d) Any individual detained as an enemy combatant by the United States shall be entitled to petition for a writ of habeas corpus under section 2241 of title 28, United States Code.

SEC. 4. TORTURE OR COERCED CONFESSIONS.

No civilian or military tribunal of the United States shall admit as evidence statements extracted from the defendant by torture or coercion.

SEC. 5. INTELLIGENCE GATHERING.

No Federal agency shall gather foreign intelligence in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). The President's constitutional power to gather foreign intelligence is subordinated to this provision.

SEC. 6. PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENTS.

The House of Representatives and Senate collectively shall enjoy standing to file a declaratory judgment action in an appropriate Federal district court to challenge the constitutionality of a presidential signing statement that declares the President's intent to disregard provisions of a bill he has signed into law because he believes they are unconstitutional.

SEC. 7. KIDNAPPING, DETENTIONS, AND TORTURE ABROAD.

No officer or agent of the United States shall kidnap, imprison, or torture any person abroad based solely on the President's belief that the subject of the kidnapping, imprisonment, or torture is a criminal or enemy combatant; provided that kidnapping shall be permitted if undertaken with the intent of bringing the kidnapped person for prosecution or interrogation to gather intelligence before a tribunal that meets international standards of fairness and due process. A knowing violation of this section shall be punished as a felony punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to 2 years.

SEC. 8. JOURNALIST EXCEPTION TO ESPIONAGE ACT.

Nothing in the Espionage Act of 1917 shall prohibit a journalist from publishing information received from the executive branch or Congress unless the publication would cause direct, immediate, and irreparable harm to the national security of the United States.

SEC. 9. USE OF SECRET EVIDENCE TO MAKE FOREIGN TERRORIST DESIGNATIONS.

Notwithstanding any other law, secret evidence shall not be used by the President or any other member of the executive branch to designate an individual or organization with a United States presence as a foreign terrorist or foreign terrorist organization for purposes of the criminal law or otherwise imposing criminal or civil sanction

[BridgeTheGap]

4. It doesn't make you wrong to agree with Paul on certain issues

but that, in and of itself, isn't enough for me to support him. First of all, he is a REPUBLICAN.
Second, he is a libertarian, which begs the question: how much government is necessary to secure the rights and ECONOMIC Interests of the American people?

[Mojorabbit]

5. I am not talking about

supporting him for president. I am talking about supporting his excellent bill. It addresses so much of what we have lost. I am amazed that I didn't find out about the bill on this site. I saw it and stood back and saw clearly how both parties seem to mostly be ok with the status quo of the destruction of the constitution as no one else but Dennis and Dodd are addressing it. I find it frightening.

[BridgeTheGap]

7. Anyone co-sponsoring the bill?

That can be telling.

[Mojorabbit]

8. No

no one else is cosponsoring it according to http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-3835
It is not even scheduled for debate and I think it is one of the most important debates we need to have in this country. If the Dems want to be bipartisan I can't think of a better place to start than with this bill. I am glad Naomi Wolfe mentioned it in her article on HP or I would have never heard of it.

[lvx35]

2. Ron Paul is starting a vanguard party on the right, we should be taking notes.

A somewhat small but extremely dedicated group of people willing to give their lives (and lots of money) to an ideal. Its proving very effective, but we are still sitting around clattering on our keyboards rather than doing the same. Bush deviated from the conservative ideal too much and now he's paying, but it seems like our candidates never need fear the same from us.

[Mojorabbit]

3. I feel the same way

and I am a bit disconcerted that I found out about his excellent bill from a Naomi Wolfe article. I get most of my political news here and now see I have been in a bit of a bubble. Even though he is not my idea of a presidential candidate, I would have thought this board would have at least posted that he had put this bill up for consideration and urged members to call our Dem congress people to sign on to it. Restoring the constitution is my number one priority.

[Renew Deal]

6. I agree.

Watch this video. You couldn't speak more clearly. I wish a Democrat would have the balls to say this. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/video-network?channel=1&video=79