Comments on: Ron Paul for President

By: Mary

Mary — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:53:16 +0000

I’m not sure if this is true for every state, but this is an open primary, you can vote for whomever regardless of whatever party you’re registered under. But, you can only vote for one.

By: Cardinal

Cardinal — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:38:23 +0000

We didn’t listen to Pat Buchanan fifteen years ago and nearly everything he warned us about has, unfortunately, come home to roost — NAFTA and the loss of American jobs, the disastrous internationalist military exploits, the illegal alien invasions, etc. It would be nice to think that the country has learned something and that Ron Paul has a chance. But if he even begins to get close (as did Pat when he won the New Hampshire primary in ’96) the press will paint him with the blackest brush they can find. Remember how the press invented Pat the anti-semite? Well, how fast do you think it would take them to discover Ron Paul the anti-semite…or racist…or nut case (Goldwater?). Not long.

Anyhow… Good for you Andrew, I’m with you… and Ron Paul.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:23:08 +0000

Andrew I am glad to see your support of Ron Paul. While he may not be a member of the Catholic church, you can be assured this man's ideas and values, concepts of life and liberty and politics, are more Catholic than any other politician running for president. And to reply to your earlier question about libertarianism, it's very origin is in the Catholic church matter of fact. Libertarian thought is based on natural law and free-will/voluntary principles, principles which we see in the bible as God has made of thinking creatures who asks us to join him of our own will. Many of today's libertarian ideas come from the writings of Augustine's just war concept, Many ideas of Thomas Aquinas, several insights from medieval popes, and also the British Catholic thinker and writer Lord Acton was also a heavy influence on Libertarian thought. Here are some sites related to these ideas and discussions, and while none of them are claimed to be Catholic based, you will see that the majority of the contributors to these sites are Catholic, again showing Catholicism's heavy origins to libertarian thought: http://www.acton.org/ http://www.lewrockwell.com/ http://www.mises.org/ http://www.antiwar.com/

By: kd

kd — Mon, 28 May 2007 00:27:51 +0000

I, for one, am not sure whether a stated commitment to a belief “system” (keeping in mind that such a commitment may or may not be sincere — especially in the case of politicians) is more important than intelligence and the ability to articulate ideas (or beliefs, as may be the case).

If integrity and commitment (hopefully combined with intelligence and articulate speech) are not the things which make up a “successful” presidential candidate, then our “system” is, of course, in deep trouble.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 27 May 2007 23:59:26 +0000

Well this is probably the most complete and serious discussion of Ron Paul that’s EVER occurred. At long last, a U.S. presidential candidate Ayn Rand would support. So he’ll stand up for what he believes in no matter the political consequences. Leaving aside the fact that many of his positions reflect America of the 1920s, consistent ideological integrity and uncompromising commitment to personal ethics are not the things that make up a successful presidential candidate; they make up a saint.

By: kd

kd — Sun, 27 May 2007 23:00:49 +0000

If appearing presidential means to be intelligent, articulate, and have a strong sense of one’s own belief system, then Ron Paul is indeed presidential.

Considering the results of tha last election, a strong sense of one’s belief “system” (a rather mechanistic term, don’t you think?) certainly trumps intelligence & articulate speech. At least in this country.

By: GregY

GregY — Sun, 27 May 2007 19:15:53 +0000

Only when we are able to submit our will to the sweet yoke of Christ do we find true freedom.

By: GregY

GregY — Sun, 27 May 2007 19:12:20 +0000

As for that quality media pundits refer to as “presidential” — I’m not sure I know exactly what it means.

Perhaps it is the lack of that quality–whatever it is–that is making people long for it in the next president.
I think that what people mean when they say that someone seems “presidential” is basically someone that appears to be articulate, intelligent, and who has a strong sense of his own belief system.
While W. might not excel in the former two attributes (to put it charitably), Kerry was questioned on the last one, which, I think, played a large part in his undoing in ’04.
Just my two cents.

By: Andrew's Brother

Andrew's Brother — Sun, 27 May 2007 10:15:24 +0000

I am as far left from Andrew as you can get and I believe in Ron Paul. Not that he can win but that maybe for once he can change the way politics work in this country. By telling the truth. Being Andrew’s brother I have always held my own bliefs. Never conforming to either the Catholic Church, The Air Force or any thing else that has tried to mold me. I thank God very much for people like Ron Paul.

By: Dino Marcantonio

Dino Marcantonio — Sun, 27 May 2007 02:03:55 +0000

“Lastly, regarding Libertarianism in general, how do you reconcile this with the views of people like Dr. Otto von Hapsburg and Benedict XVI, who seem to favor a more moderate, if not social democratic form of government?”

My guess is that Ron Paul’s ideas could indeed be harmonized with those of the Pope and Otto von H. in the sense that Paul believes the individual states are constitutionally free to follow the social democratic model. The federal government does not have such constitutional liberty. (Whether it ought to have that liberty is another question.)