Sunday, January 06, 2008
Debating Change
Last nights Republican and Democratic debates were eye opening. The most interesting moments were the powerful words of wisdom from Ron Paul on the Iraq war, deficit spending, and monetary policy. I am baffled by the republican’s views on foreign policy and Ron Paul held their feet to the fire. He had the balls to hold a mirror up to these warmongers and fear peddlers. Thank God for Ron Paul’s voice last night! He made the rest of the bunch look like idiots. If I were not a Christian with a strong allegiance to Jesus’ message about sharing my wealth with those less fortunate, I would certainly vote for him. I used to be a libertarian before I devoted my life to the message of Christ.
I wonder where Republicans get their information about the Middle East? They are convinced that the anger of terrorists is not a product of our past involvement in the Middle East. I guess they listen too closely to their own propaganda machines. Have they ignored the complete history of our involvement in the Middle East? Have they ignored our mistakes? Don’t they know the United States made Afghanistan the mess that it is now by funding them in the cold war against Russia? Haven’t they taken a history class and learned how EVERY empire in the history of the world has self destructed by stretching its military power beyond capacity into foreign lands and spending themselves into bankruptcy through a doctrine of fear and paranoia? It seems like these candidates live on another planet. Thank you Ron Paul for bringing the debate back down to earth and exposing their ignorance on foreign policy.
Today, Fox news will host a republican debate but guess what? Ron Paul is being excluded. Why exclude the candidate who seems to win every debate? Here is a website protesting the exclusion. It is a shame that his voice will not be heard by those who need to hear it the most.
On the other side, Obama came across as very presidential. Edwards continued to speak with the most passion (maybe a bit too angry) and made another strong appeal to the middle class. Clinton is doing her best to recast herself as a change candidate. Richardson proved he had no business in the debate.
11 comments:
couldn't agree more. i like ron paul. which is saying a lot since i'm an obama man. edwards says the best stuff. and he would almost convince me if i just believed he was really like that and not the man who just started talking about this stuff about a year ago, right about the time he got his $400 haircut.
I also find Ron Paul refreshing when he talks about foreign policy. It makes me wonder about the other republican candidates that they don't understand the basic concepts he talks about. But, I also have problems with his domestic policy. Enough problems that I don't think I could ever support him.
Oh well, I guess that's why I supported Obama at the caucus.
I disagree that your dedication to Christ and your position for concern for the poor should make you against Ron Paul. The economic ideal of Christ is to have "no poor among them" but it is not to be brought about my a governing body deciding to take from some and giving it to others. It is to be by the decision of the individual and to be motivated by love, not force. I say to the government let me keep the taxes you took from me and I'll turn around and make more change for the benefit of the poor myself or giving it to a Bill Gates Foundation or a Room to Read and we will create more impact with fewer resources than any government-run welfare or aid system and do so in a way that does not breed dependency and destruction of self-respect of the poor.
I'll spare you all my thoughts on the debate in this comment but you're welcome to read my full take.
Dave,
Government does not "take from some and give to others". It asks everyone to pay for the services they get and determines the price based on your ability. I can't imagine anything more fair than a progressive tax system. You pay for what you get. They more you benefit from the services and systems, the more you pay.
You could shift the money from government programs to private programs but the same problems would be in private programs. Problems follow money. That is inevitable. There is nothing wrong with asking everyone to pay their fair share.
A pure market driven system only does one thing.... create a few wealthy elite with the rest peasants. That can be seen by studying the history of any society that didn't have a government to "govern" the markets.
You can't mask selfishness with "market economics". Trust me, I've been there and had to do some soul searching. It sounds good, but at its heart is selfishness.
Ditto on Ron Paul and our current foreign policy!
Mike, I just want to say I have a totally non-romantic crush on you! Thanks for coming by my blog. I am loving exploring yours! I tend to attract a lot of fundies or ultra conservatives, so I could use the help! It’s very important to me that all sides are represented. Anyway, have a great night and I’ll be back!
Thanks Tia Lynn! I'm enjoying your blog also.
Mike I need your help. Since you were a former libertarian/conservative guy, there is a discussion going on over on my blog about whether it is constitutional or not for the government to give aid to the poor...do you have any thoughts on this?
sorry my response is a little late (I guess I can't get updates with an open id).
I agree that in this world free markets left completely to their own lead to all sorts of inequalities and problems and powered by selfishness, or more specifically greed. And we most definitely needs checks on that selfishness before our society or world breaks out in all out war because of the inequalities in wealth (the argument can be made that that is already happening)
I am no doubt thinking in utopian terms but I was just pointing out the difference in motivation between the Christian ideal regarding money, which I think starts with the acknowledgment that all is a gift, coupled with complete freedom of choice no force or against a personal will, with giving being motivated by love.
Part of the tone in my comment probably also comes from my own frustrations with government welfare or development work and its effects on the people. I believe there are better ways. Some of those ways can harness the power of market mechanisms with appropriate checks and balances so I still have faith in the power of the market but yes, with human nature, checks must be established.
I too love Ron Paul and his message. I would disagree with you that Paul is a racist. The article reprinted in the paper was timed carefully to hurt him in NH. Ron explained on his website that he didn't write the article, and that it was printed under his name. He had approved the article without reading it, and has regretted it since.
I don't have any opinion about Ron Paul's racism. I really don't care about his personal views. I do think there is something to be learned by the fact that he is supported by racists. There is a good reason they like him. His economic policies favor the current oppression and balance of economic power that perpetuates race inequalities.
Post a Comment