ecojaded wrote:

Exactly, it's critical to know what the real issues are, and not be distracted by the sound bites and attention-getting games that are what fills most of the media time and space.

Dead Heads for Ron Paul!

Actually I think it is lame for them to support specific candidates. I was pretty disappointed when they called their last Dead tour Deadheads for Obama.

It goes against the inclusiveness that the Dead embodies, and makes people feel unwelcome if they disagree politically.

But I have always thought that the freedom and liberty promoted by Dr. Paul goes well with the attitude of a typical deadhead. After all, the freest government I've ever known is the self governing practices of Dead tour!

Ron Paul and his anti-abortion views are incredibly hypocritical to his libertarian, "no big government" policies...that is, keep the government out of our lives..unless it is a social issue he feels strongly about. Then it 's BIG GOVERNMENT all in. He has some decent ideas...but that hypocrisy is a deal breaker.

SpaceCaptain wrote:

Welcome to the Forum, Space Captain! I can understand the concern about inclusiveness, you have a point. But I disagree that Ron Paul's policies mesh with the typical Dead values. The exception would be drug policy, which I do agree him with on, and to some degree on his foreign policy, though not to the degree of isolationism he would embrace. But I know very few people who want no regulation on water and air quality, food and drug safety, or the financial sector. I think that would be a nightmare. Dr. Paul also feels that health care is a privilege for only those who can afford it, whereas most people I know think access to care should be a right. I don't want to be working in an ER and have to require you to show cash before I treat you. Ron would think that's a perfect free market solution. And if a woman I know is impregnated during a rape, I would hope she could terminate that pregnancy, if that was her choice. Ron wants to again make abortion illegal, no exceptions; he just wants it done at the state level. Not exactly "liberty" when he's telling people what they can and can't do with their own bodies.

Ron Paul talks a good game. He even has some very good policy positions in a couple of areas. But his, and most libertarians', overall philosophy, which boils down to "every man for himself", is pretty much the antithesis of my value system and what I've experienced the community-oriented values of the Dead scene, as varied as it is, to be. Just my 2 cents!

.

Phred ! Welcome !

I have read Ron Paul Manifesto. Talk about deal breaker.

In all the bad decisions Obama has had to make, or has made, killing the Tar Sands Pipeline a positive. Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it if you're interested in passing a little thanks to Obama.

DangerousDan, i can well appreciate your cynicism. The depravity of the political system is beyond words, though murder, thievery, and liars comes quickly to mind. Fortunatly I have a friend from Chicago who is much more familiar with Obama than I. I don't believe that my vote will even be counted. I do believe the corruption is so extreme that Jeb did corrupt the Florida vote. The twin towers did not fall straight down without explosions. Off track again? Not. Point being: I am sure if I don't vote, the world dominators / manipulators/ powers that be, other than GOD, who would rather I didn't vote, but give them their control, after all my and our collective good is in their best interest (< SARCASM), would in fact have succeeded in keeping me from voting, because I don't believe in this corrupt system. F_ck it, perhaps I should just off myself, that would also be in their interest, for I am apposed to oppression. Conspiracy only makes good business sense. Everyone, study alternative sources.

Welcome Phred, I think I'm in that picture, what time/ day?

Hi Sue. I agree with you about the lack of environmental controls and abortion issues. Paul says that he would prefer to allow the states to individually regulate such matters, rather than having a very large federal agency do so. This doesn't necessarily mean zero regulation on water/air quality, it just delegates the enforcement to smaller communities.

I suppose my comparison of Paul and Dead tour was more in the economic spectrum. Free enterprise at its finest, with little regulation or oversight. And the sense of community and sharing of the Dead came about naturally, not through government mandates. I wish the entire country was level headed enough to do the same.

Imagine a whole country full of heads! Lets secede!

I better watch my words, or the SOPA guys will get me for treason.

He will need the ECO vote come Dec. He hasn't been to popular with the movement as of late.

I saw Rick Perry last night say that if we just "Neuter the EPA" we can turn the economy around.

Can't see the eco-vote going anywhere else, but I do thank him for his efforts in holding that project back untill after the election.

Environmental impact assessment needs to be done publically and not by a consulting company that is affiliated with those who stand to make money off of the project.

ecojaded wrote:



TRUE! The mis-informed voter is our biggest obstacle... Plus, if people want to see EVERYTHING privatized (Better pay

your fire department bill/pay-off), vote wacko Paul. Want to see more deregulation and crony capitalsm, the kind of policies

that got us into this economic mess in the first place? Vote Mitt or angelic Newt...both very hard working citizens!

It's frustrating to me that candidates are expected to follow a party line when life is full of problems that cannot be solved by a conservative or liberal or libertarian. A lot of people will vote Republican even though they know it's the wrong decision for the environment more often than not just because they believe for example that abortion is murder. Why should I have to pick my poison like this. I think Ron Pauls position on abortion has to do with at least less govt. on abortion because, and I may have my info incorrect, I believe as it stands now abortion is partly subsidized by big brother and funneled to places like Planned Parenthood. I'm not saying I'm against choice either and just use this to make a point. All I'm saying is it's not one size fits all and I like Ron Paul but we have to have some form of leadership where there are those checks and balances as well. But how to end the Gridlock? Obama while not perfect has had a heck of a mess to clean up and from my boots on the ground position I for one am thankful, my wife was uninsurable before he went to work.

Gordon the Drummer wrote:


no jeff?

Fourwinds, actually there is zero federal funds that go to abortion and having the government decide for women what they do with their bodies is more government involvement not less. Ron Paul talks less government but just like the rest of the RP what they really are talking about is where there should be government, not about less or more. Look at the record of DP v. RP and you will quickly see that the RP increases government just as much and usally into social issues (including drug use!).

My wife also now has health care thanks to the health care law and our second daughter's birth did not have to come out of pocket because of it (which would have meant paying off that bill for 20+ years!). I don't like the health care bill overall, I think we need a single payer system like in all other advanced economic countries (I lived in Canada for 5 years and that system is really, really good) but it is better than it was before.

Ron Paul's states rights approach has all kinds of problems and doubt he would actually follow his own plan. He actually traces his philosophy for states rights back to the Civil War, which he claims we shouldn't have had!!! Also his stance on the Civil Rights Act is completely racist.