M*****8
发帖数: 17722 | 1 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NA06Dj02.html
Ron Paul vote raises alarm
By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON - Texas Representative Ron Paul, who 24 years ago performed
dismally as the standard-bearer of the Libertarian Party, has begun making
waves in the 2012 presidential campaign, to the extreme discomfort of neo-
conservatives and aggressive nationalists who dominate the foreign policy
rosters of most of his Republican rivals.
While his third-place finish in Tuesday's Iowa caucuses disappointed
loyalists who felt he had a good shot at winning the first Republican
primary test of the election year, the 76-year-old physician came within
three percentage points of the top two finishers - the party's establishment
candidate, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and the latest far-
right
Political insiders still believe that Romney, who gained the formal
endorsement on Wednesday of the 2008 Republican candidate, Senator John
McCain, will eventually win the party's nomination. But Paul's showing - as
well as the increased media attention he has received in recent weeks -
suggests that he could well emerge as a force to be reckoned with at the
party's convention next summer and could pose a major threat to Republican
hopes of ousting Barack Obama if he decides to run as an independent in the
November.
While Paul received just over one in five votes at the caucuses, it was who
those voters were who flocked to his banner that proved most significant,
and perhaps most alarming to the party's power brokers and its prospects for
victory in November.
According to a New York Times survey of participants who entered the
caucuses, a whopping 48% of those aged 17 to 29 said they supported Paul. By
contrast, only 13% were for Romney.
One in three voters who participated in caucuses for the first time said
they favored the anti-interventionist libertarian. Perhaps most
significantly, 44% of participants who described themselves as "independents
" or "other" (rather than Republicans) said they supported Paul, as opposed
to 18% who said they preferred Romney.
Independents, who, according to most surveys, make up around 40% of the
electorate, are generally considered critical to the outcome of next year's
election.
Why independents, young voters, and first-time caucus-goers were so
attracted to Paul is now the subject of considerable speculation and
research, if only because the candidate himself holds such unorthodox, and,
in some cases, seemingly inconsistent views on a wide range of subjects.
On economic issues, he is a loyal follower of the tenets of the so-called
Austrian School founded by such free-market ideologues as Friedrich Hayek
and Ludwig von Mises. In his more than 20 years in congress, he has
consistently voted against proposals that would increase the size and
spending of the federal government, which he considers the greatest threat
to individual freedoms. He has frequently called for the elimination of
government departments and even of Social Security and the Federal Reserve.
A proponent of "states rights", he believes those powers that are not
explicitly allocated to the federal government by the US constitution, such
as social issues like a woman's right to an abortion, the definition of
marriage, and the legalization of marijuana, should be left to the
individual states.
Consistent with his libertarian views, he has also been outspoken in defense
of basic constitutional rights, including everything from the right to bear
arms to restrictions to be free from warrantless searches and seizures.
Unlike any of his Republican rivals, he has strongly and repeatedly
denounced the 2001 Patriot Act, which greatly expanded the government's
powers to detain terrorist suspects, the use of torture against detainees,
and the growth of Islamophobia, especially among Republicans.
He may be best known for his strongly anti-interventionist and anti-war -
critics say isolationist - views on foreign policy, views that have garnered
him a growing following on the left of the political spectrum, as well as
the fervent opposition of Israel- centered neo-conservative and nationalist
hawks.
Paul, for example, opposed congressional resolutions authorizing military
force against Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya and has called for radical cuts
in the defense budget, in major part by withdrawing troops from bases in
Europe, Japan, and South Korea, as well as hastening the US drawdown from
Afghanistan.
"When I see a candidate like Ron Paul, whose foreign policy is, if anything,
worse than the Obama administration apparently leading in Iowa according to
some polls, "it just gives me great concern." " said former UN ambassador
John Bolton late last month.
Bolton, an aggressive nationalist par excellence now based at the neo-
conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI), described Paul as living "
in fantasy land".
Indeed, the divergence between Paul and the rest of the Republican field has
been most dramatically illustrated during debates about Iran.
While the other candidates have accused Iran of building nuclear weapons,
described Tehran as the greatest threat faced by the US, and pledged to use
military force as a last resort to prevent it from obtaining a bomb, Paul
has not only expressed skepticism on the first two counts and strongly
opposed the third, he has argued that Washington should be able live and
negotiate with a nuclear Iran, just as it did with the former Soviet Union
and China and asked a logical question:
"Just think how many nuclear weapons surround Iran," he told a Fox News
interviewer in August. "The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The
Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there.
All these countries ... why wouldn't it be natural if they might want a
weapon. Internationally, they might be given more respect. Why should we
write people off?"
More recently, he cited the downing of a US drone over Iranian territory to
question both the hawkishness of his rivals and the militarization of US
foreign policy under both Republicans and Democrats.
"Why were we even flying a drone over Iran?" he asked. "Why do we have to
bomb so many countries? Why do we have 900 bases in 130 different countries
when we are totally bankrupt? I think this wild goal to have another war in
the name of 'defense' is a dangerous thing. The danger is really in us
overreacting."
While such reasoning is an abomination to the many neo-conservatives and
aggressive nationalists who are advising Romney, Santorum, former House
Speaker Newt Gingrich, and Texas governor Rick Perry, in particular, others,
including some leading opinion-shapers across the political spectrum
suggest that Paul is asking precisely the kinds of questions that US voters
should be considering as Washington faces an increasingly multi-polar world.
In "an era of unprecedented elite failure", noted conservative New York
Times columnist Russ Douthat last week, "it sometimes takes a fearless crank
to expose realities that neither Republicans nor Democrats are particularly
eager to acknowledge."
"There is no denying that Paul's worldview has helped him to launch a
powerful critique on American foreign policy," wrote another conservative
commentator, Daniel Drezner of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy on
his foreignpolicy.com blog who nonetheless stressed that he would never vote
for Paul as president.
"His hypothesis that the United States has invited some blowback by overly
militarizing its foreign policy cannot be easily dismissed."
His critique has gained traction from left-wing analysts as well, including
Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald and Katrina van den Heuvel, the publisher of The
Nation, who recently tweeted, "I have big problems [with] Ron Paul on many
issues. But on ending preemptive wars & on challenging bipartisan elite
consensus on [foreign policy], good he's in."
Yet another commentator, author Robert Wright of theatlantic.com, noted this
week that the value of Paul's foreign policy views lie less in their
substance than "in the way he explains them".
Citing several examples, including his questioning of why Iran would not
want nuclear weapons, Wright observed that "Paul routinely performs a simple
thought experiment: He tries to imagine how the world looks to people other
than Americans."
Jim Lobe's blog on US foreign policy can be read at http://www.lobelog.com. (Inter Press Service)
| a**t
发帖数: 3833 | 2 99% of chinese haven't heard about ron paul.
【在 M*****8 的大作中提到】
: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NA06Dj02.html
: Ron Paul vote raises alarm
: By Jim Lobe
: WASHINGTON - Texas Representative Ron Paul, who 24 years ago performed
: dismally as the standard-bearer of the Libertarian Party, has begun making
: waves in the 2012 presidential campaign, to the extreme discomfort of neo-
: conservatives and aggressive nationalists who dominate the foreign policy
: rosters of most of his Republican rivals.
: While his third-place finish in Tuesday's Iowa caucuses disappointed
: loyalists who felt he had a good shot at winning the first Republican
| w**********2
发帖数: 764 | | e*******l
发帖数: 1269 | 4 Excellent article. You cannot find anything like this in the US mainstream
media. Why? They have become the mouthpiece of the establishment (a.k.a.
ruling class), and are doing everything they can to smear and discredit Ron
Paul. Thanks to the Internet, they don't have the monopoly on the
information any more. People are finding the truth and letting their voice
be heard.
中国人，特别是在美国的中国人，为了不让我们的下一代生活在永久的贫穷和受压迫之
中，为了不让战争贩子把祸水引向neo-con预定的终极目标--中国，甚至简单到为了废
除不平等的Affirmative Action让我们的孩子有机会上常春藤，都应该站出来，支持
Ron Paul, 支持独立自由。 | l********k
发帖数: 14844 | 5 从全球华人整体利益的角度看，荣炮应该是最佳候选人。其次是罗姆尼。战争贩子桑托
罗幕会让美国华人活得更拮据，但是他会加深美国对中国的依赖，所以长远看还是好事。
对华人，包括中国华人和美国华人最不利的候选人是巴马。想选巴马的华人脑袋都得好
好修理修理。
Ron
【在 e*******l 的大作中提到】
: Excellent article. You cannot find anything like this in the US mainstream
: media. Why? They have become the mouthpiece of the establishment (a.k.a.
: ruling class), and are doing everything they can to smear and discredit Ron
: Paul. Thanks to the Internet, they don't have the monopoly on the
: information any more. People are finding the truth and letting their voice
: be heard.
: 中国人，特别是在美国的中国人，为了不让我们的下一代生活在永久的贫穷和受压迫之
: 中，为了不让战争贩子把祸水引向neo-con预定的终极目标--中国，甚至简单到为了废
: 除不平等的Affirmative Action让我们的孩子有机会上常春藤，都应该站出来，支持
: Ron Paul, 支持独立自由。
|
|
