Skip to content

Ron Paul President?

A reader has asked an interesting question — what would be the result if libertarian Ron Paul were elected President. This is not a hypothetical question — some poll show him leading in Iowa. Whether you’re a fan of Paul or not, if you can imagine a scenario that is likely to happen if we had a libertarian president, please share it with the rest of us in the comments. You know, scenarios based on us going back on the Gold Standard, legalizing drugs, making abortion illegal, etc. Humor is encouraged, but to be truly funny they must have an element of truth.

If you aren’t sure of Ron Paul’s positions on various issues, here’s a few sources: Official Campaign website, Wikipedia page, RonPaul.com, Daily Paul, and Who is Ron Paul.


© Jim Morin

Share

22 Comments

  1. titojackson wrote:

    longtime fan and lifelong progressive – though i agree we have reason to worry i do think the “making abortion illegal” thing is a bit intellectually dishonest. the end result would be it’d be legal in states like new york and illegal in those places where they’ve pretty much done everything they can to do so already (including shoot doctors). but the point would be that there’d be no law that says it’s illegal either (to a libertarian the point is that’s the same as a law that says it has to be).

    obviously it’s a step backwards but really i believe what will happen is people will leave those shitty states in the long run (as they should). fuck everything about those people. arizona wants to make racist laws it means latinos like me don’t show up there (and will never go to a wedding or even watch a sporting event that takes place in that state).

    now again i’m not a libertarian. i have studied with these people and i disagree with them them, but i do think we’re scaremongering a bit like they do. their philosophy is going to break a lot of things but we should not be so naive to think that all of it is useless.

    as a progressive i believe the drug war is the civil rights issue of our time. the numbers justify this attitude, and i think obviously what makes us “progressive” and not “liberal” is that we’re willing to take bits and pieces of philosophies if they are useful. for example, libertarians want to allow more alternative medicine. maybe this is bad but i think it’s good.

    they want a non-interventionist foreign policy which agrees very much with what gandhi believed. that’s obviously a no-brainer to a progressive.

    we all know if it’s romney they’re going to talk about bombing iran and creating jobs by lowering taxes. simply as a fan of the political process & debate i’m far more interested in an honest-to-god libertarian vs. progressive debate. i think the country deserves that.

    we know obama can bring it better than any politician i’ve ever seen (or ever will). i know the country doesn’t aree with me but he’s my JFK.

    and without putting the cart before the horse i hope that we can at least admit as fans of this thing that we follow that one of these guys will give us plastic and the other one will give us something to tell our kids about.

    and there’s the possibility that we can have 2 guys that want to end the wars running for president.

    that’s my take on it — and i’m still voting for obama but i think i’m tuning out of everything but andrew sullivan for now.

    cheers,

    -tito jackson

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 2:04 am | Permalink
  2. Falkelord wrote:

    Ron Paul gets elected president, does absolutely nothing with a Republican congress like Obama did, and then when the congress turns Democrat, he loses in 2016.

    Same shit different story.
    Still voting Obama though.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 3:59 am | Permalink
  3. Falkelord wrote:

    Also remember that it isn’t as easy for a President to get things done, because they hold little lawmaking power that the courts can’t strike down.

    Even with a Congress that can agree, it can be tedious (re: Every partisan bill). Don’t expect Ron Paul to come in and abolish the Fed, get rid of 5 departments, or balance anything.

    He doesn’t have the power to dictate the budget, he can’t strike down laws or establishments, although he can “restructure” departments.

    I don’t see why his supporters are so sure the same thing that happened to Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr, and every president ever will not happen to their golden boy.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 4:01 am | Permalink
  4. Falkelord wrote:

    And another thing: I was at his rally at LSU a few months back. People were “fired up” and by that, I mean they came in and clapped at the right times, but when he said “And abolishing the war on drugs” the place went apeshit. This magical cult following of college age students that makes Paul so strong are actually a bunch of stoners and very few that actually know his other positions.

    Sorry for the triply post. IK if you want to combine them into one, please do so. I blame the new year’s drinking :D

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 4:04 am | Permalink
  5. Bard wrote:

    I think Fakelord has it right with his #2 comment. There was also a post about Paul the other day at Sadly No. People who are for Paul, tend to agree with his positions without realizing where Paul is coming from on them.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 4:15 am | Permalink
  6. I find that the people who have the strongest political opinions are generally those least qualified to have them. I think Ron Paul is the exception to this rule.

    It doesn’t matter what any of us thinks might happen in a Paul Presidency; I feel the same way that I felt when Obama was running: I want the man to win in order to actually find out.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 5:32 am | Permalink
  7. ebdoug wrote:

    I was a couple of blocks away in Buffalo at a ACBL bridge tournament when an abortion doctor was killed while sitting at his kitchen table during breakfast, leaving a wife and four sons. New York has its crazies also, but I’m so glad I live in a blue state. I love all our laws.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 6:28 am | Permalink
  8. Marcus Bales wrote:

    Modern Cybernetizen’s Song

    Netizen:
    I am the very model of a modern cybernetizen
    All logic I dispense with, and all taste and manners jettison;
    I come in every stripe – from the conservative to radical,
    And know it all accept for how to spel, or write grammatical.
    I haven’t got a clue about the use of logicality
    And drivel on with made-up-factoid bargain-bin banality.
    I’m found on TV, radio, and many other medias,
    But cyberspace is where I’m most particularly tedious.

    Geek Chorus:
    He’s found on TV, radio, and many other medias,
    But cyberspace is where he’s most particularly tedious.
    Yes, cyberspace is where he’s most particularly tedious.

    Netizen:
    I flame opponents hairless from a dozen different pseudonyms
    Each one a ruder, lewder pun on Anglo-Saxon crudonyms –
    And where I find civility and hot debate have been at ease
    I break it up with spamming, flaming, scrolling, and obscenities.

    Geek Chorus:
    And where he finds civility and hot debate have been at ease
    He breaks it up with spamming, flaming, scrolling, and obscenities.

    Netizen:
    I’m known for disputatiousness and other sorts of knavery
    From purposeful mendacity to things yet more unsavory.
    I’m ignorant in every field, poetic to statistical,
    Which only makes my points of view more thoroughly sophistical;
    My attitude’s aggressive, and my tone is sanctimonious,
    My facts are bad, conclusions wrong, and arguments erroneous.
    My posts are pure unparagraphed expressions of my vanity
    Impossible to parse except perhaps for the profanity.

    Geek Chorus:
    His posts are pure unparagraphed expressions of his vanity
    Impossible to parse except perhaps for the profanity!
    Impossible to parse except perhaps for the profanity!

    Netizen:
    In short when I can tell you why I’m such a dull vulgarian,
    And why my selfish egocentric views are libertarian,
    And why my sense of humor roots about in prepubescency
    As if I don’t quite understand the cause of my tumescency,
    Or why my only mode with love is jokery and jestering
    While fear of being hurt leaves all my real emotions festering,
    You’ll know why I’m at home alone abusing my puerility,
    Compulsively exhibiting my manual facility.

    Geek Chorus:
    You’ll know why he’s alone at home abusing his puerility,
    Compulsively exhibiting his manual facility!

    Netizen:
    Wherever civil reason is accounted most iniquitous
    You’ll find me absolutely inescapably ubiquitous.
    In short, all logic I reject, all taste and manners jettison,
    Because I am the model of a modern cybernetizen!

    Geek Chorus:
    In short, all logic we reject, all taste and manners jettison,
    Because we too are models of the modern cybernetizen!

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 7:26 am | Permalink
  9. Hassan wrote:

    In Ron Paul presidency, I would feel safe from being detained or assassinated by the president for no reason.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 8:35 am | Permalink
  10. Iron Filing wrote:

    Agreed Hassan. However, I would feel much more afraid of having my life and rights threatened by unbridled corporations in a Paul presidency. Also, individual states would have greater opportunity to deny our rights as well. Paul is among the corporatist libertarians who do not recognize that the federal government is not the only threat to our liberties.

    Bottom line, more American citizens die from E. coli outbreaks, dangerous working conditions, under-regulated pollutants and corporate greed than will ever die from an American president’s executive order to assassinate one of us.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 10:21 am | Permalink
  11. Singapom wrote:

    So this cartoon suggests Ron Paul is a KKK racist?! WTF??? I hope he sues the ass off the publication. This is a ludicrous, untrue, scurrilous and damaging attack. If you want to attack Ron Paul, at least attack him for what he believes, not what his opponents want you to believe about him.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 10:41 am | Permalink
  12. Patricia wrote:

    Marcus Bales: Well Done!

    Singapom: Take Note!

    IK: Thanks, most fun I’ve had all week!

    To All: Happy New Year!

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 12:44 pm | Permalink
  13. David Chess wrote:

    I suspect he would want to dramatically scale back everything in general that the Federal government does, since he thinks most of it is unconstitutional.

    I expect that might lead to some sensible downsizing of the outside-the-borders military, and sensible cutting back on the money we spend to punish harmless drug users.

    I’m afraid it would also be exploited by businesses and other groups who would LOVE to get away with even more crap than they do now, who will encourage leaving corporations and the states to do whatever they want without any Federal oversight.

    So, more pollution, more monopolistic practices, more violation of civil rights by state and local governments, and so on.

    I doubt that that Paul supporter who wants homosexual behavior to carry the death penalty would actually get that passed in any given state, but it wouldn’t be a Ron Paul Federal government stopping him.

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
  14. Patricia wrote:

    David — thanks for a reasoned response. My main concern has been the amazing lack of consideration for what ANY policy will do to our weakened economic system. You make some very valid points. I really wonder about what further government de-regulation would do for our health, safety, and environment. And what would giving even more freedom to corporate bandits actually accomplish for the average wage earner in this country? As for the civil rights issues — what a nightmare. I have listened (conversing is not really possible!) to “Ron Paul libertarians” who try to convince me that “true” anarchy is a benevolent system!
    It’s going to be an interesting year!

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 5:02 pm | Permalink
  15. Iron Knee wrote:

    SINGAPOM, have you be avoiding the news lately? Just search for “Ron Paul racism” or “Ron Paul KKK”. Or I’ll do it for you:

    Paul denies writing or even reading racist statements that were published under his name in his newsletter. But that seems somewhat suspicious (see http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/fmr-staffer-says-ron-paul-lying-about-role-controversial-newsletter).

    Also, read this — http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/top-10-racist-ron-paul-friends-supporters/ Ron Paul has continued to support racists and be supported by them.

    Don’t get me wrong — I actually like Ron Paul and I’m glad he is running for president. And I have strong libertarian sympathies (I would love to decriminalize drug use). But to call accusations that Paul is racist “scurrilous” is itself scurrilous!

    Saturday, December 31, 2011 at 8:07 pm | Permalink
  16. Nom_de_Guerre wrote:

    Ron Swanson would be the VP

    Sunday, January 1, 2012 at 8:24 pm | Permalink
  17. Hassan wrote:

    Iron Filing, the issues you mentioned can be taken care at local city/county/state levels. But once president has power to secretly determine that you need to be killed, there is no escaping that.

    Having said that, I understand you may not be worried about it that much, but muslims are definitely worried. So for them its matter of survival.

    Monday, January 2, 2012 at 7:45 am | Permalink
  18. Iron Filing wrote:

    Hassan, you are wrong if you think I’m belittling the significance of the president claiming the right to assassinate an American citizen. That is a big deal and I informed my president, congressman and senator of my disgust.

    My point is that Paul’s extreme states rights and corporate rights positions are a far greater danger to our life, health and liberties. Providing legal cover for assassinating citizens is a big deal but providing legal cover for corporations to degrade the health and lives of all of us is an even bigger deal that cannot be practically addressed at local levels.

    To change my bottom line slightly since you bring up religious prejudice, more Muslim American “citizens die from E. coli outbreaks, dangerous working conditions, under-regulated pollutants and corporate greed than will ever die from an American president’s executive order to assassinate one of us”.

    Monday, January 2, 2012 at 8:34 am | Permalink
  19. Patricia wrote:

    IF – This article from Reuters pretty much hits the issues that we SHOULD be concerned about. Too bad that the U.S. media circus prefers shock value instead of information!

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/01/us-economy-dysfunction-idUSTRE80007M20120101

    Monday, January 2, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Permalink
  20. Hassan wrote:

    Iron Filing, I understand and see your point. And as I said it is not easy to be in other person’s shoes. For some reason I feel that in plain field, evil can be fought easily.

    With e-coli outbreaks, it would not be targeting specific minority, unlike patriot act and NDAA. Its easy to fight disease, and be protected from it, while its impossible to defend yourself from government.

    Monday, January 2, 2012 at 12:16 pm | Permalink
  21. BTN wrote:

    Hassan, I have to agree with IF. E-coli is just one example.

    Look at the air quality coal miners and nearby towns have to deal, or imagine the effects of pharmaceuticals that were too dangerous to be put on the market, or what about crops that actually produce their own pseticides? With less goverenment regualtion, how much worse would it be? Government is the only entity large enough to stand up to big corporations.

    Monday, January 2, 2012 at 3:20 pm | Permalink
  22. stdscf12 wrote:

    Let me know what you think of this Ron Paul rap song and video I just made. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mSxsDAZOU8

    Monday, January 30, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Permalink