Time Magazine believes that fascist Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is 2007's Man of the Year.
I have a different point of view.
For his lifelong commitment to truth, justice, and the real American way - the Constitution - Ronald Ernest Paul is my 2007 Man of the Year.
While the media has said much (and simultaneously said very little) about who Ron Paul really is and what he stands for, I believe that Dr. Paul's record speaks for itself.
A well-known fact, my man of the year defended liberty in 2001 when he voted against the PATRIOT Act. A lesser-known fact, and more relevant to 2007, is that "On October 15, 2007, Paul introduced the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007, which would "bar the use of evidence obtained through torture; require that federal intelligence gathering is conducted in accordance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA); create a mechanism for challenging presidential signing statements; repeal the Military Commissions Act, which, among other things, denies habeas corpus to certain detainees; prohibit kidnapping, detentions, and torture abroad; protect journalists who publish information received from the executive branch; and ensure that secret evidence is not used to designate individuals or organizations with a presence in the U.S. as foreign terrorists." - wikipedia.com
While the media has a hard time conveying (or a fun time distorting, take your pick) Paul's ideas, the 10-term Congressman from Texas explains a great deal of his positions through his writing. You can learn a lot from his columns, archived here.
Ron Paul is also a vehement opponent of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.
Ron Paul, currently running for President of the United States, is the only Republican I would endorse, and I would choose him before any Democrat, even Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich. Paul has his priorities in order: end the war, get America's financial house in order, and restore our civil liberties.
A fair interview shows that Paul is the rarest of politicians: an honest person with a chance to win.
Don't believe Paul can win? Here is one poll that says differently. This poll is far more accurate and democratic than any poll touted by mainstream media, I promise.
Ron Paul has raised over $18 million this quarter alone, because he works for the people, not the corporations.
I believe Ron Paul will win in Iowa and New Hampshire.
For everything that he stands for and everything he is poised to accomplish, Ron Paul is my 2007 Man of the Year.
Freedom prevails, Time Magazine, not fascism.
Ronald Ernest Paul, not Vladimir Vladimirovich Hillary Clinton Barack Obama Giuliani Willard Romney Putin.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think it is unfair to immediately call Putin a fascist. Yes, he has restricted rights of the Russian people over the last several years. Yes, he has expanded his own legal authority. Yes, he has cracked down on Russian media outlets. However, the Russian PEOPLE are aware of these changes (away from democracy).
The sad problem in the US is that the vast majority of people here do NOT have the slighest clue about our media censorship, the patriot atc. They are especially ignorant to that these laws are LEGAL under the 'clear and present danger' clause in the constitution.
The ironic difference between the situation in the US and in Russa is that the Putin has a high approval rating (around 2/3rds). Compare that with Bush or Congress's approval rating for that matter.
Sorry to deviate from the point of the blog. I felt it was something necessory to address.
Re: Ron Paul winning in Iowa and NH.
For the sake of America, I hope you are right. Unfortunately, I just don't think it is going to happen. I think it's between Romney and Huckabee in both states.
Putin is the most relevant Person of the Year that Time has chosen in quite a while. He may not have been warm and cuddly, but the fact he has turned Russia back into an international force to be reckoned with. You remember Russia, right? That other country in that whole mutually assured destruction thing?
And let's get one thing straight here, your boy Ron Paul is not a libertarian nor is he honest. From a recent interview:
MR. RUSSERT: What about public schools?
REP. PAUL: That's what I'm trying to...
MR. RUSSERT: Are you still for...
REP. PAUL: No, I'm not--I've never, I've never taken the position--is it in my platform? And...
MR. RUSSERT: It was--when you ran for president in 1988, you called for the abolition of public schools.
REP. PAUL: I, I bet that's a misquote. I, I do not recall that. I'd like to know where that came from, because I went...
In fact, in 1988 this is what the NY Times reported:
"If elected, he says, he would abolish public schools, welfare, Social Security and farm subsidies. All drug laws should be repealed, Dr. Paul maintains, a position that drew hisses at the university."
Looks here:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE3DA1538F934A25753C1A96E948260
He's a Republican in sheep's clothing, plain and simple, and will discard Libertarianism whenever it is politically expedient, especially now that he thinks he has a real chance at winning. He's another politician trying to catch the oncoming wave of small government conservatives reacting to the tax and spend neocons. If you want somebody honest, throw in with McCain. If you really want someone who will defend civil liberties, vote Democrat.
Hi Andrew,
I appreciate your site, blog, and your causes, but I have a question for you; are you racist? Do you think we should really fight for maintaining or reclaiming all the civil liberties you address without finding solidarity among the various races in our country? In other words, how can someone be a true American patriot if they are racist? Just wondering what you would have to say about that aspect of Ron Paul. Please see http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740. I'd really like to hear what you think about the racism. Thanks.-Jenni,
Ron Paul is not a racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvzsiESqVss
Post a Comment