20 Reasons I won’t Vote for Ron Paul.

Via on Dec 14, 2011

Update: we just published not one, but two lists of reasons to vote for Dr. Paul. Let’s hear it for learning together, and respectful debate! ~ Waylon, ed.

I like Ron Paul.

A lot. He has integrity, consistency (not always a good thing—views can and should evolve, open-mindedness is a virtue, too), his values are clear. He’s pro-Wikileaks, pro-OWS, pro-legalization, anti-war, anti-SOPA, and anti-fascist state BS.

Here’s everything we’ve blogged up about him, lately (we give him a lot of love on elephant).

But I won’t vote for him. Why? Easy:

1. He’s anti-gay marriage (supports DOMA)

2. He’s a young earth creationist

3. He’s a climate change denier

4. He believes that America, founded on principles of freedom of worship by many less-than-Christian framers, is a Christian country.

5. Worse, he believes that separation of church and state is a myth

6. He is against net neutrality (you know, liberty online)

7. He believes the civil rights act had a negative impact on the country

8. His stance on safety-nets (none, please)

9. His stance on student aid (do away with it)

10. His stance on health care (including Medicare, Medicaid)

11. His stance on abortion (goodbye, Roe v. Wade)

12. He would shutter the EPA (goodbye environmental health regulations, hello toxic daily life for our children)

13. His stance on Social Security (a hindrance to freedom)

14. His stance on taxes on the super-rich (no, thank you)

15. His stance on financial regulations (none, please)

16. His lack of support for renewable energy

17. He would close the Department of Education

18. He wouldn’t be able to bring the troops home: “Closing bases and withdrawing troops is an expensive process, and the DoD isn’t going to get very far if Congress forbids them from spending any money on it. It’s the exact same problem that prevented Obama from closing Guantanamo Bay.”

19. He signed the Pro-Life Presidential pledge, which includes a vow to only nominate pro-life judges to the Court. Generally, serious presidential candidates should refuse to sign all pledges, since they remove the rights of citizens in a democracy to see their wishes represented, and make their reps beholden to outside interests.

20. Given his ground game, he’d be tough for President Obama to beat. A lot of liberals, including myself, would be tempted to vote Paul. I’d rather Obama get to bat around damaged-goods Newt or wooden-1%er Mitt.

Still, with the exception of Jon Huntsman, he’s the best—by far—of the rest of the GOP field.

~

PS: did I forget a reason not to vote for Ron Paul? Add in comments? Did I forget a reason we like Ron Paul? Add it in comments. Did I get any facts wrong? Let me know. I know this is politics, but we can do all this respectfully. If you can’t, read this. Disrespect will be deleted.

~

Bonus:

YouTube Preview Image

About Waylon Lewis

Waylon Lewis, founder of elephant magazine, now elephantjournal.com & host of Walk the Talk Show with Waylon Lewis, is a 1st generation American Buddhist “Dharma Brat." Voted #1 in U.S. on twitter for #green two years running, Changemaker & Eco Ambassador by Treehugger, Green Hero by Discovery’s Planet Green, Best (!) Shameless Self-Promoter at Westword's Web Awards, Prominent Buddhist by Shambhala Sun, & 100 Most Influential People in Health & Fitness 2011 by "Greatist", Waylon is a mediocre climber, lazy yogi, 365-day bicycle commuter & best friend to Redford (his rescue hound). His aim: to bring the good news re: "the mindful life" beyond the choir & to all those who didn't know they gave a care. elephantjournal.com | facebook.com/elephantjournal | twitter.com/elephantjournal | facebook.com/waylonhlewis | twitter.com/waylonlewis | Google+ For more: publisherelephantjournalcom

25,945 views

If you liked this, you might like these:

140 Responses to “20 Reasons I won’t Vote for Ron Paul.”

  1. fk obomba says:

    bunch of bullshit spin doctor con artist that have no clue about ron pauls policies, and prob are down with Obombas… dont have the time, ut i will give u an example of the idiot ignorant ….17. He would close the Department of Education. Not true !! he would eliminated the FEDERAL grip on education, and letting it going back to state school system.. how it used to be!!

  2. tony the pitiful copywriter says:

    You left the part out about how he’s crazy.

    Sure, I’d love to smoke pot, not pay taxes, keep my woman pregnant. But what good would that do without any roads? That’s right, Ron Paul thinks President Eisenhower’s Interstate System is unconstitutional. Is it only because Roosevelt started it?

    While we’re on the topic, can any of you libertarians out there show me a single nation-state on planet earth that thoroughly embraces libertarian principles?

    I’ll be in the bar.

  3. MYG says:

    Here is a clip of his interview on Piers Morgan, and if you scroll to about 2-3 minutes in, you'll see that he claims to change his mind and develop his views.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d69LBsSZwxA

  4. [...] a Ron Paul fan and friend of mine insulted Obama in regards to his “evolution” on gay rights (last [...]

  5. bflatbrad says:

    because you can vote for Ron Paul or Waylon Lewis, but you can't vote for both.

  6. Jessi says:

    There are several items on this link-free list that are just not true. There's no links to the facts here at all. Just another opinionated list.

  7. elephantjournal says:

    I wouldn't be. But Ron Paul is, as I said above, a tantalizing candidate with a lot of great qualities. In the general election, I would be voting for/against him if he were the GOP nominee, of course. Would be great to see him form a third party? Seems like we need one, these days. ~ Waylon

  8. Stephanie says:

    The No Child Left Behind Act was a disaster before it started. It literally lumped all children, including those that have severe mental handicaps, into the requirements to achieve academic success. There are no provisions for exempting these children, therefore the schools that service them are doomed to fail the NCLB Report card. They also require children learning a second language to perform on par with students whose native language is English. There are no provisions allowing for these students to be excluded from the scoring for the recognized amount of time it takes to learn a new language and become adept in the academic portion of the new language. The best analogy I have ever heard in this matter was an agricultural one. Take blueberries. You want to market them in those little cartons. A farmer ships you his crop. You sort though and put the berries in the cartons to sell. Would you sell the squashed ones in those cartons? NO. But that is what NCLB is demanding the schools to do – and we are suppose to put them back together – something the medical community can't even do. With all due respect, NCLB has to go. It is simply a sink hole for more federal tax dollars, and is causing more waste on the state and local level than you can imagine!

  9. globeyogini says:

    you ROCKED this tentcityhall!! thank you from the bottom of my heart for educating Waylon AND me (i'm a RP supporter). jeesh….you would think a "progressive" subscription based newsletter would not write borderline slanderous half truths about public figures in order to sway public opinion.

  10. CelticPatriot says:

    You rock, tentcityhall. Thanks for all of the work you did in response to this discussion. Very intelligent.

  11. elephantjournal says:

    Many of your/his clarifications are unsatisfactory. Taking away a woman's right to control her own body? States rights is a convenient justification that GOPers use when convenient…or go the other direction (Defense of Marriage Act, anyone? etc…) when convenient. ~ Waylon

  12. elephantjournal says:

    You said some meanie things. We don't go in for that. That said, resepctful criticism and debate is our bread n'butte.r

    Seems we're on the same page. I respect Dr. Paul, and appreciate learning more from you re: him than what's out there. Hopefully this blog and your comments and others' can help us all dip beneath the surface and learn something. ~ Waylon

  13. elephantjournal says:

    They're up! We actually just posted two articles with lists of reasons to vote for Dr. Paul. ~ Waylon

  14. elephantjournal says:

    Thanks for your respectful rebuttal. Thumbs up!

  15. Stephanie says:

    Having read many bills/laws, I feel it is necessary to point out that you are only commenting on one item of the Net Neutrality Bill. I have found that the plethora of amendments attached to most bills, often have such negative consequences to our economy, that any sane elected official should immediately vote against the bill. Unfortunately, many do not even appear to be cognizant of the material in stated amendments – or they would be exposing them to the public. So anytime I hear someone yelling about someone voting against this or that – I take it with a pound of salt – and that applies to all parties. It is time WE THE PEOPLE actually start READING what these people are voting on – not polly parrotting what someone else says. Respectfully yours – Steph

  16. buddhaflow says:

    He named his son Randall. That is his name, nothing to do with Ayn Rand.

    She made some good points, but libertarianism != objectivism. We should help each other, the problem is being forced at gunpoint to help each other.

    And if you don't think the bailouts have anything to do with the core mission of OWS, please pack up your tent and go home. Farmville is calling.

  17. Vman says:

    Yeah and Paul would support child sweatshops if a business could make a buck. After all it's the corporations right of freedom to do business anyway they want. When Sates and others defy the constitution that clearly says we are all equal, the government needs to step in an assure minorities are treated fairly. In Ron Paul's world everything is left up to the individual assuming wrongly of course that humans will do the right thing. Look at lynchings in the south etc, did States do the right thing, NO. Ron Paul is for the freedom to discriminate.

  18. Vman says:

    The big picture is that Ron Paul is a Republican, and he supports the unlimited ability of Corporations to fund elections. Nuff said.

  19. __MikeG__ says:

    New earth creationism is just pseudo science generated by people who willfully ignore facts because those facts interfere with their magical thinking. All that is need to irrefutable disprove this joke is the existence of one single fossil. Pick a fossil, any fossil. There is absolutely no real science to support this fantasy. Plenty of pseudo science, yes. Real science. No.

  20. Vman says:

    The 99% have no use for Paul. He supports the ability of the corporation to give without restriction to political campaigns. In this regard he opposes the most central point of the OWS movement. He wants to shrink government so he can drown it in a bath tub, whose idea is that? None other than the chump in chief and corporate tool extraordinaire, Grover Norquist. We should help the black man about ready to be hung, but heaven forbid in Paul's world if we are forced to. In Paul's world freedom is all about ME ME ME and the freedom to be a heartless, greedy prick.

  21. buddhaflow says:

    But the government is currently the #1 vector of racism into the world.

    War on Drugs + War on Terrorism > All laws that prevent discrimination.

    Which would you rather have: the right to buy hamburger's from "Racist Robs Rib Roast," or the right to leave a prison you have been unfairly sentenced to?

  22. N. Falvo says:

    Gary – you should read the Entire Bill.. not the hand-picked, spoon-fed CT crap…

    here is the part of the bill that everyone is crying wolf over…

    (c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.–The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

    (1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

    (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111- 84)).

    (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

    (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

  23. N. Falvo says:

    but if you go and look at THIS part of the bill…

    (b) COVERED PERSONS.–A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

    (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

    (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

  24. N. Falvo says:

    and then of course d & e….

    (d) CONSTRUCTION.–Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

    (e) AUTHORITIES.–Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

  25. N. Falvo says:

    and of course… the most damning section against conspiracy nuts….

    SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.

    (a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

    (1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

    (2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined–

    (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

    (B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

  26. N. Falvo says:

    (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

    (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

  27. N. Falvo says:

    (b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

    (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

    here's the bill in full…

    S.1867.PCS http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pd

  28. Dylan Clay says:

    I like you!

    Also, all of the candidates have ideas of their own but it doesn't mean they will actually get them perpetuated. I voted Obama and he hasn't done anything he has said he would do to earn my vote. Patriot Act, still around, Guantanamo… still there. troops , still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bailing out many PRIVATE corporations with the promise that we( the tax payers) would pay it off. Church and state bothers me and the pro -choice issues bother me too, but not as bad as the FED, the military industrial congressional complex, and ultra greedy corporations bother me. I weigh it out. Ron gets my vote

  29. Paul Braxton Hicks says:

    …okay, let's just assume Ron Paul is a racist, and he hates 25% of the population… Fine…! …most democRats and republiCants either hate 100% of the populace, or like them, as I like a cow thinking of steak in my plate…
    …and the current politicos not only hate the American people here (they just raped everyone financially, and the MSM continues to look the other way)
    …they also hate people all around the world… well, maybe not… …they still like people from the military industry complex.

  30. ARCreated says:

    that's OK I prefer not to be labeled anything at all even "liberal" so since I have been tempted by Paul as a candidate I no longer have to worry about that label…whew :) thanks for clearing that up!! LOL

  31. ARCreated says:

    we have absolute and total control over corporations…don't buy their shit unless they follow certain guidelines. done.

  32. ARCreated says:

    no WE need to step in and ensure everyone is treated fairly…businesses not run fairly – don't shop their. We have given our power away and we have come to the conclusion that people are stupid and evil and greedy. I think maybe i have a different view.

  33. Anna says:

    Hear! Hear! Well said!

Leave a Reply