[PAA-Discuss] [SPAM] Re: Mikal's Thoughts on Ron Paul, standing up for our beliefs
Kathleen Kain
kkain1 at earthlink.net
Mon Nov 12 16:28:11 EST 2007
I don't think showing "Freedom to Fascism" indicated that the PAA endorses
the abolition of the IRS. Geez, give people some credit. They can use their
own critical skills. The film was obviously propaganda and offered no
evidence for some of its claims, such as the 16th Amendment was never
ratified by the requisite number of states. The point of the SCS was to
bring different groups together to discuss the issues important to them and
to identify common ground. I'm glad I finally got to see some of "Freedom
to Fascism" because I had heard a lot about it and wanted to know what
proof it offered for some of its more radical assertions. Now I know.
And, Bill, seriously, who would walk out because a film was attacking the
IRS? It's not like people go around waving signs that say "Don't Touch Our
IRS." Maybe a more equitable way to finance the federal government does
exist.The pressing issue is not how the government gets its money, but how
it spends it. And if "Freedom to Fascism" does nothing else progressive, it
makes people think about all the money used to pay off the interest on the
federal debt, which is fueled by endless warring.
Kathleen Kain
kkain1 at earthlink.net
"Peace is a civil right which makes all other human rights possible."
Dennis Kucinich, January 2003
"We have a right to be free from war."
Dennis Kucinich, February 2003
"Come, my friends, tis not too late to seek a newer world."
Alfred Lord Tennyson
> [Original Message]
> From: Bill Crosier <paa at crosierbiomed.com>
> To: PAA Discussion List <discuss at paa-tx.org>
> Cc: Mikal Hutto <Miklhut at aol.com>
> Date: 11/12/2007 10:53:11 AM
> Subject: [SPAM] Re: [PAA-Discuss] Mikal's Thoughts on Ron Paul, standing
up for our beliefs
>
> I think Mikal makes some very good points, and I've been thinking the
same thing.
>
> I'd like to point out that the VFP Veteran's Day parade entry was not a
PAA event, even though we were invited and I and a number of other PAA'ers
joined VFP there. It isn't our (PAA's) place to say who can or cannot
participate in a VFP event. However, Ron Graham did ask the Ron Paul
supporters yesterday (before the parade) to stop displaying their Ron Paul
signs or leave (or something to that effect), and they chose to leave. I
was one of the people who expressed my concern about this to Ron, and I
think he did the right thing. It was not fair for the Ron Paul folks, even
though they just wanted to support their candidate, to use the VFP entry in
the parade to push their agenda. I'm as strong a supporter of Kucinich as
anyone, but I didn't bring a Kucinich sign nor even wear a Kucinich shirt
yesterday at the parade, and I don't think the Ron Paul folks should have,
either. If they were there to support VFP, as the rest of us were, then
they could have done that without their signs and shirts.
>
> There's a much bigger issue about Ron Paul and PAA, though. I respect
his willingness to buck the leadership in the Republican party and stand up
the fascist-in-chief against the Iraq invasion and occupation. And I
respect his libertarian views on issues involving privacy (that the
government should stay out of people's personal lives). I'm glad we gave
him the Defenders of Habeas Corpus award last year, that Lee Loe
originated, because of his opposition to the USA PATRIOT Act.
>
> However, Ron Paul's positions on so many issues are directly opposite to
what PAA stands for. He generally toes the libertarian line (except on
opposition to abortion, as his position seems to directly contradict the
libertarian position of no government regulation). However, his
libertarian position on social issues really contradicts what we stand for,
and I want to make it clear that I do NOT want PAA to be associated with
him because of this. He opposes government regulation of business, social
security, the environment, welfare in any form, etc. He believes that
somehow the free market will cause businesses to behave themselves and act
responsibly, while all the evidence says it won't. We learned that from
the robber barons of the 19th century, and both Ron Paul and the
Bush/Cheney regime want to go back to that era of letting big business
control everything possible and let profits decide what is right. I (and I
think all PAA'ers) believe that businesses, especially big businesses, need
to be regulated, but Ron Paul would rather give away the keys to the candy
store to the biggest multinational corporations and let them make all the
policies on the environment, workers' rights, and just about everything
else.
>
> For anyone who is new to PAA and doesn't know what we stand for, please
see the info on our web site. Click on the "About PAA" tab at the top
(just below the header graphic) of any page on our web site, or go directly
to http://paa-tx.org/about For details, scroll down to the bottom of the
About page and click on the title of any of the issues/resolutions listed
there -- these give a concise summary of we support and believe. Well over
half the issues listed (probably 3/4, although I haven't counted) are about
180 degrees from Ron Paul's positions.
>
> You may note that abolishing the income tax (as many of the Ron Paul
supporters seem to want) is NOT one of our issues. I don't understand why
we showed an excerpt from a video on that subject (actually, it was on
questioning the legality of the income tax) last night. I think it
undermines our credibility, and I noticed that several people walked out of
our movie night right after that was shown. I think we should at least
have stated a disclaimer -- that this does not represent PAA's views on
this subject.
>
> We need to stand up for our principles. Free speech does not mean that
we should allow other groups to use our organization to push their agenda,
when it is contrary to what we believe in.
>
> Comments?
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> At 10:02 AM -0600 11/12/07, Ron and Kris Graham wrote:
> >I got permission from Mikal Hutto to post this to the PAA discussion
list. Below are her feelings on Ron Paul. Please read her statements and
comment if you are so inclined. I would like everyone's opinion on Ron
Paul's stance on abortion rights and stem cell research. I don't want to
read comments on his support for the U.S. Constitution and his views on the
Iraq war. I already know where he stands on that. I want to know how anyone
on this list can support a man who would deny a woman a right to a safe,
legal abortion and deny millions of people access to cutting edge medical
technology based upon needed stem cell research.
> >
> >Thanks very much. I look forward to the replies from Ron Paul supporters.
> >
> >Kris
> >
> >
> >From: Miklhut at aol.com [mailto:Miklhut at aol.com]
> >Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 9:39 AM
> >To: Miklhut at aol.com
> >Subject: Ron Paul
> >
> >The local peace community will be forced to take a stand regarding the
Ron Paul supporters. They show up at every function now, waving their
signs, banners and pictures of Ron Paul. This gives the impression that we
are all supporters of Ron Paul, and we are going to have to be bold enough
to disengage from them, and ask them to leave, otherwise the perception to
the community is that we all support Ron Paul. In essence they are
hijacking every event, and giving the entire community the impression we
all support Ron Paul. This has to be stopped.
> >
> >Let's talk a little about Ron Paul. Ron Paul is a Libertarian and the
money is coming from the Libertarian party and their supporters. He is
against abortion rights for women, although he is a Gynecologist and knows
what happens when poor women are denied abortions. He is against
government funding of Stem Cell research, although he is a doctor and knows
the possibilities. He is a Libertarian, NOT a Republican, so why does he
support the Government dictating the rights of women and science? We could
speculate that it's for votes or his own personal views. Either way it is
wrong.
> >
> >Here is a statement in the Preamble of their Platform:
> >
> >As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all
individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to
sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.
> >
> >Here is Ron Paul's statement on abortion rights for women. NONE.
> >
> >
> >Life and Liberty
> >
> >The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the
American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record
demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.
> >In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an
abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a
pregnant woman.
> >In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as
beginning at conception, HR 1094.
> >I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of
Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with
state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to
ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic
and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.
> >Are we to believe because some rich, white guy never had to have an
abortion or perform one, he has the right to dictate to the entire
population? Abortion rights in this country were hard won, they are by no
means guaranteed. These rights are being assaulted on every front.
> >
> >Maybe someone can explain to me how denying women abortions gives them
sovereignty over their own lives? Women and young girls who are too poor
to pay for abortions should be forced to have children that they can't
support, or don't want? Tell that to the mother of a 12 or 13 year old,
that some older man has taken advantage of, or a rape victim. Tell that to
a mother of four, who is working two minimum wage jobs to try to feed them,
who's birth control failed. Yet, there will be no help for these same
women to take care of these children. If Ron Paul has his way, all welfare
and support for the millions of children that are at risk in this country
will be cut off. Ron Paul has the audacity to claim that Welfare harms
these children, many of who still go to bed hungry at night. My daughter
teaches at an Inner City school, and hungry children are NOT a figment of
our imagination. I welcome any of you to come and see for yourself.
> >
> >The argument has been made, "he's Anti War." Is he Anti War or is he
using the Iraq war, the same as he is using the abortion issue to gain
votes? Who is he? What is he? Why would any woman support a man who
would put her rights in the hands of men, strangers to her? We all know
what happens when young girls and poor women are denied abortions. You
don't stop abortions, you only stop SAFE abortions. If abortion rights are
repealed we will descend to the backalley butchers who flourished in every
city before abortion became legal. Emergency rooms will once more be
assaulted with young girls who have tried to self abort and are bleeding to
death as a result. The elite will still obtain their safe abortions while
the rest of the population suffers. He is not in favor of help for raising
these poor children that he would insist be born. Make no mistake Ron Paul
IS one of the elite, and he is NOT a Republican. He has a LOT of money
behind him, and he is just as dangerous as those aligned with the Bush and
Cheney Regime.
> >
> >Even if he is genuine about wanting to end this war, will we compromise
our morals on all other issues because of this one stance? Isn't that how
we got into this mess in the first place?
> >
> >As a woman and a member of the human race, I cannot support Ron Paul on
any level and I do NOT want to be perceived as being his supporter. If
this continues, I will be forced to make signs and carry them to every
function that are ANTI RON PAUL. How is this constructive to the causes we
champion?
> >
> >Americans have to take a stand and demand candidates that offer equal
rights for all. If we compromise ourselves and support a man who we KNOW
does not support our basic values or allow ourselves to be used because we
won't stand up to them, aren't we culpable for what happens should he be
elected?
> >
> >Mikal Hutto
> >Woman
> >Human Being
> >
>
> --
> Bill Crosier
> paa at crosierbiomed.com 713-641-4941
> Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
> Fear Ends, Hope Begins... http://kucinich.us/
>
> ---------------
> Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
> Discuss mailing list Discuss at paa-tx.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on
this list, go to:
> http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org
>
> To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
> To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply
All".
> Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes
to the correct address.
More information about the Discuss
mailing list