Ron Paul’s Hopes for the Future

[AZXD]

I've always liked the words Ron Paul can put together

Yet with Rahm Emanuel as the chief of staff ... Something tells me we will see a continued Interventionist style ... Time will tell.

Ron Paul’s Hopes for the Future

November 11th, 2008 11:22 am | by mike miller

In his weekly texas straight talk, Ron Paul congratulates Barack Obama for making history this election, and voices his hopes that the new administration will not make the same interventionist mistakes that were made in the 30s which exacerbated the problems of the great depression:

With the election behind us, our country turns hopeful eyes to the future. I have a few hopes of my own.

I congratulate our first African-American president-elect. Martin Luther King, Jr. certainly would be proud to see this day. We are stronger for embracing diversity, and I am hopeful that we can continue working through the tensions and wrongs of the past and become a more just and colorblind society. I hope this new administration will help bring us together, and not further divide us. I have always found that freedom is the best way to break down barriers. A free society emphasizes the importance of individuals, and not because they are part of a certain group. That’s the only way equal justice can be achieved.

We will face more tough economic problems during this new administration. In fact, the worst is yet to come. A vast amount of problematic mortgages have not begun to reset their variable interest rates and go into default. We already have unprecedented deficits, spending is out of control, and more big industries are coming to government with their hands out. My hope is that this administration will handle this economic crisis better than the interventionists and big government spenders of the 1930’s, the bureaucrats that prolonged the Depression. I hope that new government programs and spiderwebs of red tape do not pop up to interfere with American productivity, and that we can quickly get our financial footing again. We have to understand that an economic correction needs to take place and the only way out of the coming recession is to go through it. Efforts to avoid it can only prolong it. I hope we can somehow find our way back to sound money and reject corporate cronyism.

We cannot address our budget problems at home without changing our disastrous foreign policy abroad. I am hopeful that the new administration can take on the mantle of peace and diplomacy in foreign policy that many Americans feel they were promised. Many other nations also have this hope, which exudes from their congratulatory sentiments offered after the election. They hope that national sovereignty will be respected. They hope that through diplomacy violence and war can be averted. I hope so too. One thing is unquestionable: our aggressive foreign policy of the past has been costly, in blood and in treasure. Our treasure is running out, and fewer volunteers are stepping up to enable that foreign policy. So for these reasons, if we are to continue to have an all-volunteer military, and see prosperity again in the future, I have every reason to hope our foreign policy will change. In order for it to remain the same, mandatory military service would have to return, as well as accelerated theft through debt and inflation to pay for it. I have a hard time imagining popular support for these policies, simply for the sake of war and conquest, when we clearly want peace.

I have many hopes for the future in this time of transition. But I have seen this country face many forks in the road, and sadly take the wrong one too many times. We have heard a lot of talk, and it remains to be seen what actions and specific policies that talk will translate into. So while I may be hopeful, I remain deeply concerned about our future.

[street cruiser]

Too bad Ron Paul didn't make a better showing in the presidential race. He strikes me more as a statesman rather than a politician.

[AwPhuch]

Originally Posted by street cruiser

Too bad Ron Paul didn't make a better showing in the presidential race. He strikes me more as a statesman rather than a politician.

Too bad the liberal media didn't already decide who they were going to put in office by blatant lop sided reporting and give him a fair shake...they slammed the door on him even before he got one foot in.

I truly believe is he would have been able to get his views out there..things might have looked ALOT different at the polls

[eric_t12]

You guys are silly, talking about this loon like he would have changed anything.

Obama doesn't want bailouts, he doesn't want to stay in afghanistan and iraq to 'get it right,' he doesn't want to give 'stimulus packages,' and he doesn't want these things because he is NOT like bush.





oh wait, he wants all those things...


"meet the new boss; same as the old boss."

[ForTehNguyen]

thats all the game is, you trade one problematic politician for another. Like Reagan said "govts dont solve problem, but rearrange them"

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by AwPhuch

Too bad the liberal media didn't already decide who they were going to put in office by blatant lop sided reporting and give him a fair shake...they slammed the door on him even before he got one foot in.

I truly believe is he would have been able to get his views out there..things might have looked ALOT different at the polls

In fairness, yes the media shut him out ... But so did the Republican party.

I can't say I blame them ... He wanted to fix D.C. ... Not perpetuate it and make it grow.

[ForTehNguyen]

Ron Paul on CNN again:
Commentary: GOP should ask why U.S. is on the wrong track - CNN.com

(CNN) -- The questions now being asked are: Where to go from here and who's to blame for the downfall of the Republican Party?
Too bad the concern for the future of the Republican Party had not been seriously addressed in the year 2000 when the Republicans gained control of the House, Senate, and the Presidency.
Now, in light of the election, many are asking: What is the future of the Republican Party?

But that is the wrong question. The proper question should be: Where is our country heading? There's no doubt that a large majority of Americans believe we're on the wrong track. That's why the candidate demanding "change" won the election. It mattered not that the change offered was no change at all, only a change in the engineer of a runaway train.

Once it's figured out what is fundamentally wrong with our political and economic system, solutions can be offered. If the Republican Party can grasp hold of the policy changes needed, then the party can be rebuilt.
In the rise and fall of the recent Republican reign of power these past decades, the goal of the party had grown to be only that of gaining and maintaining power -- with total sacrifice of the original Republican belief in shrinking the size of government.

Most Republicans endorsed this view in order to achieve victories at the polls. Limiting government power and size with less spending and a balanced budget as the goal used to be a "traditional" Republican value. This is what Goldwater and Reagan talked about. That is what the Contract with America stood for.

The opportunity finally came in 2000 to do something about the cancerous growth of government. This clear message led to the Republican success at the polls.

Once the Republicans were in power, though, the promises faded, and all policies were directed at maintaining or increasing power by trying to whittle away at Democratic strength by acting like big-spending Democrats.

The Republican Congress never once stood up against the Bush/Rove machine that demanded support for unconstitutional wars, attacks on civil liberties here at home, and an economic policy based on more spending, more debt, and more inflation -- while constantly preaching the flawed doctrine that deficits don't matter as long as taxes aren't raised.
But what the Republican leadership didn't realize was that ALL spending is a tax on middle-class Americans through price inflation and that eventually the inevitable consequence is paying for the extravagance with a financial crisis.

Party leaders concentrated only on political tricks in order to maintain power and neglected the limited-government principles on which they were elected. The only solution for this is for Republicans to once again reassess their core beliefs and show how the country (not the party) can be put back on the right track. The problem, though, is regaining credibility.

After eight years of perpetual (and unnecessary and unconstitutional) war, persistent and expanded attacks on our privacy, runaway deficits, and now nationalization of the financial system, Republicans are going to have a tough time regaining the confidence of the American people. But that's what must be done.

Otherwise, Republicans can only mimic Democrats and hope for an isolated victory here and there. And that's just more of the same that brought on the disintegration of the party.

Since the new alignment of political power offers no real change, we will remain on the same track without even a pretense of slowing the growth of government. With the new administration we can expect things to go from bad to worse.

Opportunity abounds for anyone who can present the case for common sense in fiscal affairs, for protection of civil liberties here at home, and avoiding the senseless foreign entanglements which have bogged us down for decades and contributed so significantly to our fiscal and budgetary crisis.

During the debates in the Republican Presidential primary, even though I am a 10-term sitting Representative Member of Congress, I was challenged more than once on my Republican credentials. The fact that I was repeatedly asked how I could be a Republican when I was talking a different language than the other candidates answers the question of how the Republican Party can slip so far so fast.

My rhetorical answer at the time was simple: Why should one be excluded from the Republican Party for believing and always voting for:

• Limited government power
• A balanced budget
• Personal liberty
• Strict adherence to the Constitution
• Sound money
• A strong defense while avoiding all undeclared wars
• No nation-building and no policing the world

How can a party that still pretends to be the party of limited government distance itself outright from these views and expect to maintain credibility? Since the credibility of the Republican Party has now been lost, how can it regain credibility without embracing these views, or at least showing respect for them?

I concluded my answer by simply stating the Republican Party had lost its way and must reassess its values. And that is what needs to be done in a hurry.

But it might just take a new crop of leaders to regain the credibility needed to redirect the Party. It certainly won't be done overnight. It took a long time to come out of the wilderness after 40 years of Democratic rule for the Republican Party to take charge. Today though, time moves more quickly. Opportunities will arise. The one thing for certain is that in the next four years we will not see the Republic restored. Instead the need for it will be greater than ever.

The problems are easily understood and the answers are not that difficult. Abusing the rule of law and ignoring the Constitution can be reversed. If the Republican Party can grasp hold of the needed reforms, it can lead the way and regain its credibility. If power is sought for power's sake alone, the Party will never be able to wrench away the power of the opposition.

In the past two years, I found that when the young people heard the message of liberty, they overwhelmingly responded favorably, fully realizing the failure of the status quo and the need to once again endorse a system of self reliance, personal responsibility, sound money, and a non-interventionist foreign policy while rejecting the cradle-to-grave nanny state all based on the rule of law and the Constitution.

To ignore the political struggle and only "hope for the best" is pure folly. The march toward a dictatorial powerful state is now in double time.

All those who care -- and especially those who understand the stakes involved -- have an ominous responsibility to energetically get involved in the battle of survival for a free and prosperous America.

[Dhunter55]

Originally Posted by AZXD

I've always liked the words Ron Paul can put together

Yet with Rahm Emanuel as the chief of staff ... Something tells me we will see a continued Interventionist style ... Time will tell.

AZ, welcome back to the R3VOLution.

[Powerman]

How exactly do you get a party to put itself out of buisness?

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by Dhunter55

AZ, welcome back to the R3VOLution.

I never left ... I was off conducting special ops based on statistics