"Resolved: Ron Paul, as US President, would be disastrous for America."

[packbat]

Being a liberal Republican, it is meet* for me to state my stance on Ron Paul.

I believe that Ron Paul would be a terrible President for the reasons cited here. Most prominently among these are:

• The gold standard would lead to economic turmoil (not to mention devastate industries which use gold),
  
• The abolition of the income tax would cripple the federal government,
  
• A law to prevent the Supreme Court from ruling on an issue is un-American, even when it is not explicitly intended to bolster prejudice,
  
• Racism - be it against black men in DC or immigrants throughout America - is wrong, (edit: I cannot defend this claim; I withdraw it.) and
  
• Undermining modern medicine would destroy millions of lives in the most brutal fashion.

Citations for Ron Paul's support of each of these are in the link.

* "Meet" meaning suitable, proper, appropriate. It's standard.

Comments

Re: lol

[peri-renna.livejournal.com]

Oh, I forgot:

And it's unconstitutional (if you forgot, the constitution is about as american as you get) for the supreme court to make decisions on matters the federal government has no constitutional right to control

Which is something they have not done and show no signs of being about to do (at least regarding the issue in question).

Re: lol

[(Anonymous)]

er, they've been doing it for years, Roe vs Wade is unconstitutional

Re: lol

[peri-renna.livejournal.com]

Do not be absurd.

A warning: if you fail either to identify yourself (that I may address you as a fellow individual) or to show some sign of willingness to defend, rather than merely propound, your views (that I may address you as a fellow debater of issues), then I may no longer offer you the courtesy of spamming my space with your comments. I am willing to be disagreed with, but - as long as I control this space - only by those willing to respect my capacity for honest reason.