I don't agree with everything Ron Paul stands for either, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing. It certainly beats the indirect form of corporatism that Obama and morons like Romney are in favor of. Both of them are for several acts which offer huge illicit funding for military and security industries, as well as funding the illegal drug trade for the benefit of pharmaceutical corporations. Paul's statements on the illegality of these acts (and how he'd repeal them) reaffirms that, and if you do any of your own research you'll realize that most of them are what is bankrupting the (already bankrupt) US. Paul's version of corporatism (economics) is visible in several rising countries like Brazil and Southeast Asian nations.[QUOTE="ColdExistence"]
Oh, and he's about as pro corporatist as it gets.
Saturos3091
There's definitely a reason the guy has tons of international support compared with other candidates. Plus his views on civil liberties are something a lot of candidates don't share and I think that's his primary appeal.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Ron Paul was against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Now, I don't know the specifics of why he was opposed to it, but that doesn't exactly scream civil liberties pioneer in my book.
Log in to comment