Feb 272012

When I saw Lawrence O’Donnell’s piece on Ron Paul last week, I was going to do a writeup on it as I know way too many liberals who like to think he is the ‘real deal’ when it comes to being a libertarian and left of the center. True progressives do not follow the libertarian way as there are too many issues that they would overturn that affect all our civil rights and that is wrong. I have written on this subject before and so have many  other true lefties on this subject as to why Libertarians are wrong as far as we lefties believe. But I will say that Infidel’s two posts on this subject are great reads and explain well the difference between lefties and libertarians…but I digress.

Anywway…He isn’t even close folks. His views on few issues, like being anti-war and personal drug use are libertarian, but in the final analysis, he really isn’t even fucking close.

He is a racist for starters. Do not make me explain why on this issue, as it’s been beaten to death by both the Corporate and the Alternative Media. His position on women’s reproductive rights, birth control and..my personal favorite… just having sex in general should curl the hair of anyone that truly believes they are left of center or even a libertarian. Watch the short video below of O’Donnell ripping Paul a new ass on the critical issue of women’s reproductive rights…and…how sex is a bad, immoral pleasure.

If that isn’t enough, then perhaps Sam Seder’s show from January of this year below will convince you as to why supporting Ron Paul is a bad idea and not worth your time, if you are left of center and consider yourself a proud leftie. The interview is with Tim Wise. It’s worth the listen…especially for all you Ron Paul fans. Paul really has just a few issues that lefties agree with him on.

Below is the Blacking It Up piece referred to in the above video:

Liberals/Progressives need to stop ignoring the bullshit Ron Paul spouts on other important issues. Agreeing with him on one or two issues it NOT enough to support him, it just isn’t. The man is a loon on so many other issues it’s fucking pathetic. He’s the guy that believes we should all be allowed to carry a gun when we fly so as to deter the terrorists from hijacking the plane…give me an effin break!

Plus, as a Doctor of Women, a gynecologist ..which he is…to be against womens reproductive choice is just horrible and disgusting…not to mention he thinks that sex, for any reason other than procreation, is wrong and makes me nauseous, not to mention it’s friggin laughable in this day and age.

Ron Paul is NOT your guy folks…not when you take all the issues and put his views up against them. Sure, he says the right things when it comes to being anti-war, baling out the banks, and legalizing drugs..but the vast majority of his beliefs just don’t cut it…sorry, but they don’t. So quit ignoring his stances on all the issues…consider the man as a whole…because you will not like what you hear.


I am a..brown Cali bitch that is quite the opinionated,political, pain-in-the-ass, in your face kinda girl that also loves baseball and music to a fault. Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.--Albert Einstein-*

  6 Responses to “The hypocrisy of Ron Paul’s libertarianism. Listen up progressives!”

  1. Thanks for the info! Very interesting. I find him fascinating especially when seeing his supporters. Blacks, white supremacists military, Conservatives, Liberals…They are all over the place.

    I’ll admit. When he starts talking anti-war and says the things we’ve all been saying, I get hypnotized. He’s the only one up there that says it.

  2. After having observed libertarians and their politicians for some time, my opinion is that there are no “true” libertarians in office. I’d put that down to libertarianism being totally impractical in practice.

    I still don’t see the case for Paul being a racist. He clearly had racist supporters during his time in the political wilderness. The author of the first link simply puts words in Paul’s mouth without providing any real justification. The other rehashes what we already know, and not terribly well. When someone points out why this couldn’t be explained as Paul tolerating support from people he shouldn’t have at a time when he probably felt he needed it, I’ll reconsider that judgement. Meanwhile, he’s the only candidate who has pointed out the racist aspects of the drug war, in any recent election.

    Having had the misfortune of having a racist or two in my extended family, I can tell you that silence isn’t always assent. Sometimes, it’s just not wanting a useless argument.

    On the other points, he’s certainly no progressive. His only saving grace is that he would proably try to put our government back into the practice of obeying the rule of law, and he’d do whatever he could to get us out of the useless wars we’re in. None of the current crop of candidates is worth very much. All of them are clueless on the economy. Most are clueless on human rights, and except for Paul, all sound somewhere between unnerving and frightening when it comes to the issues of Iran and terrorism. Nor do I expect Obama’s newfound respect for womens’ rights to last long past election day, particularly if he is confronted with a Republican Congress.

    • I call him a racist because he allowed racists to print on his site without calling then out…at the very least he is an enabler of one of the worse kind of humans allowed to roam the earth,

  3. I put Paul in the same category as Nader….a media whore!

 Leave a Reply


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>