Hearing a politician addressing actual long term issues makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Great video, jonny. I know you down voted my Ann Coulter video , but I figure it's because you have a distaste for her. I agree - I cannot hold anyone's opinion against them. I can't stand her either. I think the Republican Party has gotten it wrong for years, and the word 'Republican' is now synonymous with evil, even with me. I am on this guy's side 100%, and somehow thniking I'm on the side of the Republican's really messes with my head.

In any event, keep up the Ron Paul videos, brother! This guy is making great sense. We need more support for this guy.

*Ron Paul

Shit, that channel doesn't exist yet... I guess election 08 will have to do.

seems too good to be true, and if he gets elected, hard to see how radically different things'll be. but worth a shot going for logic over pr.

For some reason the Stryper song "Free" comes to mind, although I feel like that's the wrong feeling for this... meh, just upvote.

Now that this has made it out of the queue, I figure I would go ahead and make my reasons for posting it known. I do not endorse Ron Paul. There are many issues on which I agree with him, mostly in terms of foreign policy. But in terms of domestic policy, he would be a nightmare, and this interview, more than any prepared campaign vid circulating on the net, shows exactly what he is about.

Some great instances of what I'm getting at:

1) Get rid of the department of education? It should be one of the most heavily funded departments and, imo, should be reorganized to include NSF, NIH, NEA, etc. To leave curricula up to local control is madness, and is the reason we have local school boards trying to shove creationism down our kids throats. And additionally, notice how he thinks the federal courts should not prevent public schools from organizing prayer. While correct from a strict constructionist point of view, it's also crazy. It is true that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," it seems to me that on the same legal basis, Congress should be able to prevent local authorities from doing the same.

2) Get rid of income tax? Well, what do you plan to replace that with Dr. Paul? A national sales tax that overwhelmingly favors the rich? Or perhaps you intend to institute a wealth tax?

3) How about the federal goverment passing out money to people in New Orleans. Shameful and irresponsible. We should've just let it sink into the Gulf, right Ron? I wanted to jump through the tubes and throttle him for that one.

There's plenty more there to pick apart, and hopefully some others will, and really get this discussion going.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Although a lot of his ideas do sound a bit crazy - he makes it clear that we shouldn't expect all of his idealistic policies to be put in place. He can't repeal the IRS just because he's the president - nor the department of education. I think it's a case of overshooting. He would be lucky- with a friendly congress- to get 10% of the things that he wants done.

If that 10% is an about-face on current US foreign policty - I think he should be supported.

Originally the US was a loose confederation of states. You need to get the other meaning of "state" in your mind. A state like - Japan is a state, not a province. RP would like to return to that. Something like the EU, wherein each US state is a country in a loose confederation.

IMHO this is not a bad thing. The disharmony between the coastal states and "Jesustan" in the middle, highlights that the US is made up of regions where the majority have very little in common with each other.

Kansas wants to teach Intelligent Design in the classroom? OK, fine. Thank Darwin, I'm from the Republic of California.

I bet Ron Paul would appreciate my consistency in downvoting of even the slightest whiff of him here.

Who's house? Ron's house!

jonny,

If you would listen to Dr. Paul, you would realize that those issues wouldn't be a problem.

1) Get rid of the department of education? It should be one of the most heavily funded departments and, imo, should be reorganized to include NSF, NIH, NEA, etc. To leave curricula up to local control is madness, and is the reason we have local school boards trying to shove creationism down our kids throats. And additionally, notice how he thinks the federal courts should not prevent public schools from organizing prayer. While correct from a strict constructionist point of view, it's also crazy. It is true that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," it seems to me that on the same legal basis, Congress should be able to prevent local authorities from doing the same.

The DoE is one of the most under-performing government agencies. Ever since it was created, the amount of federal money spent on education has increased while the quality of education for the average student has gone down. In any free market, such a department would be closed down, not given more money. But that's not even then point. The federal government has no authority to regulate education without a Constitutional amendment, as you mention. So, if you think federal government control of education would be better than local governments despite 225 years of contradictory evidence, by all means, change the Constitution. Otherwise, it's un-Constitutional.

2) Get rid of income tax? Well, what do you plan to replace that with Dr. Paul? A national sales tax that overwhelmingly favors the rich? Or perhaps you intend to institute a wealth tax?

Dr. Paul has already explained his position on the income tax quite thoroughly. You do realize that the income tax only covers approximately 30% of federal spending, so if you cut spending, it would be quite easy to do without an income tax. So, why replace it with anything? We did just fine without an income tax prior to 1913.

3) How about the federal goverment passing out money to people in New Orleans. Shameful and irresponsible. We should've just let it sink into the Gulf, right Ron? I wanted to jump through the tubes and throttle him for that one.

Once again, it's not the federal government's responsibility to redistribute wealth from citizens, regardless of the situation. At the same time, FEMA has proven itself to be an horrendously wasteful and inefficient government program, like most federal institutions.

Re: Local solutions.
Local solutions ARE BETTER, many states are ahead of federal regulations when it comes to education, environment, drug policy, minimum wage, etc. Once a few states have a better solution to any given problem then other people in other states will want better solutions for their states. Centralized power in such a big country is far too slow to respond and when it does the policies are watered down and corrupted. The more I think about it the harder it is to imagine a huge central government doing anything without being slow and wasteful.

-Karl

I've always thought the schools should be privatized and the DOE dissolved. Yes, you'll have Christian schools that teach creationism, but you'll also have a whole spectrum of other choices. I'm a rare homeschooler in my area because I'm not a bible belt baptist taking my kids out of school for religious freedom. I will not be teaching creationism to my children. BUT... A parent should have the right to decide the curriculum for their children. Imagine how great schools could be if they were all competitive? The best teachers would have jobs because they would be better paid. Less bureaucracy around to pay would lighten the burden too.

My opinion is that throwing more money at the school system will not improve education in the U.S. Have you noticed how much tax comes out of your paychecks for the schools in the area? Imagine if you had that in your pocket to pay for a great private school that does a much better job at providing your child with an education?

Same goes with the income tax. We're getting taxed to death! Cut spending, lose half of these failing gov. programs, and put money back into the people's pockets and watch the economy improve.

Local solutions ARE better.

Centralising control of schools and hospitals in the UK has been a complete disaster.

Ron Paul has it right on both foreign and domestic policies. America is very lucky to have him running right when the country needs him. I hope the American people take a little bit of a leap of faith and vote for him.

<edit> Sigh.

*1stTube

Adding video to channels (1sttube) - requested by Grimm.

It amazes how many people don't trust the local government to do a good job and assume that the Federal government is better and more efficient then local government.

If we cut spending back to the level of spending just 7 years ago we would not need an income tax. The Federal government is now in the business or collecting our money and then redistributing it to the companies, groups, and individuals that helped get them elected.

^THAT is the point right there.
why are people so scared about giving up dependence on armies of idiot civil servants bathing in free money?

famous anecdote... on a visit to London last century, a soviet official asked "who is responsible for the bread supply to london?" and couldn't believe that there was NOBODY responsible, and that supplies were so plentiful. think. about. it.

I am kind of tired of all the Ron Paul stuff here, nothing against the poster.

Ron Paul is out of his mind if he thinks South Koreans want to be reunified with Orwellian North Korea by the military might of Kim Jong Il. Without U.S. forces stationed in South Korea, the North could conquer the South very quickly. Kim Jong Il has the 4th largest army in the world.

The reason Education has been such an underperforming agency is because of the adamant demand for local control. The dept is hamstrung by a million different petty bureaucracies, often filled with people who have little or no experience in education.

the quality of education for the average student has gone down ... 225 years of contradictory evidence

Those statements are what's contradictory.

I agree there is a constitutional issue to be dealt with on this. But so is there a constitutional problem of the federal government mandating the 21 y.o. drinking age, for instance.

Dag - not all of the founding fathers envisioned the U.S. as a loose confederation. Read some of Hamilton's essays on the subject. Besides, we don't live in the 18th century anymore. Travel, business, communication are all vastly more free flowing now than even Hamilton expected. On the other hand, it is because of the expense/difficulty of communication and travel for many citizens that national laws on things like abortion, separation of church and state, equal rights, etc., are needed.

Karl (swedishfriend) - you give no context for claiming local solutions are better, just abstractions. Perhaps local solutions would have been better in determining voting rights in the south? Or maybe water usage in the west? I'm not saying that the national government always has the answers, but it is absolutely necessary to have a coherent national policy on things like energy policy, free speech, capital punishment, bank regulation, and on and on. [edit] Just reread your comment Karl - my apologies, you did give some specific examples. But take the minimum wage, for instance. How many states would have none were it not for the federal minimum wage? Yes, many states are ahead of the federal government on things like environmental policy, but how many more would be completely backwards without it?

The reason I can't support RP isn't because I think he will be able to get all of those things done, but because those views will inform all of his decisions. He will push an agenda of strict constructionism on every issue, and it's this blind allegiance to the "intent of the founding fathers" that I find troubling. The founding fathers could not possibly have foreseen the issues we face today. What would they have made of the immigration debate? They wouldn't understand half the complexities involved.

Dag - you don't care if Kansas is teaching creationism? What about when one their graduates becomes a high school science teacher in your district? Or is appointed to the federal bench?

We did just fine without an income tax prior to 1913.

We did just fine without an interstate highway system then too. Welcome to the 21st century.

it's not the federal government's responsibility to redistribute wealth from citizens, regardless of the situation

Taxes are exactly that - a redistribution of wealth - in all forms. Medicare? Interstate highways? NSF grants? The list goes on. The purpose of redistributing wealth is to enable the creation of greater wealth for everyone. The rich get richer, and the poor get richer. It's called the common good.

FEMA has proven itself to be an horrendously wasteful and inefficient government program

That is because of cronyism, which is far worse at the local level.

If the federal government had answered years of calls from folks in Louisiana to help rebuild the wetlands and improve the levee system, that tragedy would likely never have happened.

I do want to point out that as a man of principle and integrity, I admire RP quite a lot. The election could definitely use more honesty like his.

It amazes how many people don't trust the local government to do a good job

I grew up in southeast Louisiana. That should pretty much explain it. Although, I have to say, as I've moved around the country, I've seen as much corruption and incompetence everywhere else as there.

For me, RP is interesting not because of his specific goals, but for his desire to work within the system. If laws or systems are outdated they should be amended or repealed, not just ignored. For too long public officials at all levels have done whatever they want in order to accomplish their goals instead of working within the system. "The ends justify the means" is not a political platform that should be supported ever again.

Whoa - it got creepy at the end. "Do you want me to pick you up?"

his eyes did seem to shift around there a bit, doogle.

it's hard for me to become sold on a candidate at this point. ron paul has many good ideas, and actually seems inspired by the constitution. as has been said, it's highly doubtful he'll get most of his more radical ideas passed through the senate and house. if kucinich and ron paul end up having love baby i'll vote for it, until then i'm not sure whom i'll "throw my vote away" for.

I have to admit something...I don't read any comment over 6 lines long. Is that normal or am I just a lazy asshole that seems like he doesn't care about any point of view that can't fit onto a bumpersticker?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'republican, election, primary, pbs' to 'ron paul, republican, election, primary, pbs' - edited by Grimm

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by eric3579.

Grimm has fixed this video's dead embed code - no Power Points awarded because Grimm's points are already fully charged.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'ron paul, republican, election, primary, pbs' to 'ron paul, republican, election, primary, pbs, newshour' - edited by Grimm

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Grimm.