Uncategorized

Why I’m Supporting Ron Paul

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated,” explained Thomas Jefferson.

Those enuerated powers are as follows:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, Dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; — And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

For roughly 100 years, these Constitutional limits were respected, though they almost immediately faced challenge from would-be do-gooders.

As early as 1794, James Madison wrote disapprovingly of a $15,000 appropriation for French refugees:

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

Today, the spirit of Mr. Madison’s commitment to Constitutional integrity lives on in only one Presidential candidate.

That’s why I’m supporting Ron Paul.

As Reason editors Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch point out in yesterday’s Washington Post, I’m far from alone. Rep. Paul set a one-day Republican fund-raising when he pulled in $4.3 million from 38,000 Internet donors on November 5–Guy Fawkes Day, which commemorates the British anarchist’s 1605 plot to blow up Parliament.

Paul supporters like these are fed up with paying Big Brother intrusive taxes to fund invasive regulations and even corporal violations like random gropings and naked X-rays.

Rep. Paul’s supporters share Mr. Fawkes’ frustration with big government, and thank the drafters of our often-ignored Constitution that we have more appropriate ways to address it.

9 thoughts on “Why I’m Supporting Ron Paul

  1. Very good post. I’m for Ron Paul as well, and I hand out some of his items in this liberal town of Eugene, OR.

    Ron isn’t perfect and there are a couple of things I disagree with him, but compared to the other options he is the very best choice for our country.

    The two biggest threats to Americans are:
    1 – Reducing the power of our Constitution and increasing the illegitimate “authority” of global influences;

    2 – An ever-increasing government in size and oppression.

    I do agree with the previous commenter when he asks where does the Constitution grant government power over prescription drugs. Drug costs are high for one reason because our big government controls who can buy from who, how, when, etc. If I wish to buy a prescription drug from Canada via an online store and I can scan my prescription to them, I can be put in prison! WRONG!

    April 15th is coming up and most people have been fooled into how much the government has robbed them. Their taxes are taken from them before they even see their check stubs – painless. Then, if they paid a bit too much they get a refund and think things are great!

    Unreal!

  2. I’ve read some things I really like about Ron Paul, such as his ideas on freedom, smaller federal government, free markets, greater personal responsibility, the Second Amendment, and border security as well as his strict Constitutionalist ideas to do away with the Department of Education, The Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Reserve Bank, the elimination of Medicare and Medicaid, US membership in the United Nations and NATO. I think his views about the abolition of federal drug laws are interesting, too. They made me take a VERY close look at the guy.

    But I’ve been very disturbed by the allegations of racist statements in his newsletter and the evidence that points to him lying about them. That, and his connection to white supremacists and conspiracy theorists.

    Here are a few good links with lots of evidence to sift through:
    http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2008/01/proof-ron-paul-lied-about-not-being.html
    http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/05/20/ron-paul-his-racial-views/
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740
    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/01/ron_paul_racist/

    Taken together, it’s too much for me to swallow.

  3. Leslie, you are heroic for supporting the champion of the Constitution. Keep up the good work of explaining liberty to America!

  4. Hmmm. We would have to ask Ron Paul for his specific reasons, but I will hazard a guess based on his comments on Social Security, which can’t be found in the Constitution either. He is of course in favor of eliminating Social Security, but he has said on numerous occasions that he would use part of the savings from reducing our worldwide “police” force to help tide people over who are currently dependent upon such programs. By way of analogy, it’s a bit like discussing the fact that the Constitution doesn’t support subsidized housing. Strictly principled Constitutionalists without a heart might say, “Burn the houses down immediately”, while Ron Paul and other Constitutionalists with hearts would say, “Yes, but let’s get all the people out first.”

  5. “anonymous” is obviously a weak-minded coward. Otherwise, why be anonymous? I could see it if you were revealing earth-shaking secrets that put your life in danger… but what, pray tell, are you hiding from?

Comments are closed.