Thursday, September 13, 2007

Ron Paul: Libertarian Apostle - Is Pittsburgh native Ron Paul the champion that libertarians have been seeking?

Big article in Pittsburgh City Paper quotes me, Mark Rauterkus, about Ron Paul for President.
Ron Paul: Libertarian Apostle - Is Pittsburgh native Ron Paul the champion that libertarians have been seeking? Or just an Internet flash-in-the-pan - Main Feature - Main Feature - Pittsburgh City Paper - Pittsburgh

'He's definitely the best candidate out there right now for this country,' says Mark Rauterkus of the South Side, a vice chair of the local Libertarian Party and a fixture on local ballots. 'I think he's a libertarian through and through, and I am certainly supporting him.'
Of course others are quoted in the article too, including our F-bomb dropping neighbor and fellow blogger, M.L.

The article is long and it isn't all positive. Furthermore, there are few points that I'd want to touch up. Generally in an article of that length, it would open plenty of areas where more clarification would be justified. But in this article, I want to begin by being complimentary to the writer, Charlie D.

For starters, my quote is fine. Hey, I'm a fixture! There might be a future in that fixture statement. How about: Rauterkus, a fixture for freedom. Or, Fix our Future and vote for Rauterkus, the fixture for controller. Perhaps, Rauterkus, the fixture with a grip.

Bumper stickers and button slogans welcome. (Fixture, future, framework, fitness, flow, freedom, flush, ...)
From signs
The worst statement in the article is at the top. The article say: He (Ron Paul) opposes the government enforcing any law, or offering any service, that is not explicitly prescribed in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. One world is missing. Insert FEDERAL before GOVERNMENT.

When I talked to the reporter and gave the interview we covered this topic. Ron Paul has a much more limited view of what the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT should do than other politicians. The FEDS need to do certain things. The STATE of PA needs to do other things. County government and city (municipal) government needs to do certain things too. Each layer of government has its PURPOSE. Purpose is very important to the overall health of the system and it makes a huge call to process.

Too often those in power now try to blur the divisions among the various levels of government. Local concerns need to stay local. National concerns should be managed at the federal level. State's rights issues directed to a candidate for US President are out of bounds and need to be dealt with accordingly.

Sure, there is some overlap. Sure, I want to be open and honest. But, we need to have discipline in what we expect and demand from government and the people we elect in these political roles.

Federal money should not be paying for a tunnel under the Allegheny River for light rail expansion to the new stadiums. This is just one example of how the region and nation has its wires all crossed these days. We have certain groups of people and other piles of money doing different things -- and it is all done so as to avoid accountability. The confusion is often done by design to help the status quo. We are talking about FUD 101 (FUD = fear, uncertainty, doubt).

The FEDERAL Money comes to PAT (Port Authority Transit) for a capital project so local people can't object, yet they pushed for it, and are able to say falsehoods. City council, authority boards, overlords, county council, county executive -- yet alone voters, are all 'off the hook' and 'without accountability' for hundreds of millions of dollars that goes under the river (literally).

Ron Paul is not against finding lost children. He is against the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT doing it. Ron Paul is right. Ron Paul got some local money for the sheriff to beef up its missing children programs.

Ron Paul would say that government could and should enforcing law and offer services that are not prescribed in the U.S. Constitution if those activities happened at the state, county, and municipal levels.

I call myself a "COMMON SENSE LIBERTARIAN." Government has a role to play in our lives. Really, governments have various roles in our lives as we need to keep distinctions among the various levels of government.

Pittsburgh's political landscape is in terrible conditions because many people in high places are clueless as to how the different branches of government and the different levels of government should behave.

City issues need to be handled by the city -- not with state bailouts nor state appointed overlords. Mission creep is killing our public process and our public lives have become a heavy burden and anchor that pulls down our private and economic lives as well.

From RonPaul
More from the article.

Nit picks: Ron Paul is a Republican. He is also libertarian and constitutional. Not "OR" -- but "and."

What a guy did when he was five is not as important as what he did last week. But, I guess this article needs to be written in Pittsburgh as he was here when he was five. But the milk man chatter and image of him in a white hat serves little use.

Furthermore, what was published on the internet in hate-filled sites serves little use as well. Furthermore, Paul's newsletters published decades ago -- and taken out of context -- is hard to battle.

From RonPaul
Quote: Paul is delivering a radical, energizing political message to the masses. I don't think Ron Paul is 'radical.' He is more like 'milk.' Meanwhile the others who want to run for president are the pop, fizz, bubbles and JOLT. Many of the others seeking to be president are drunk on power.

Quote: running ... as an Internet insurgent.
Insurgent! Ron Paul is a ten term US Congressman. He is a veteran -- with a "stint" of six years.

Quote: ... ... the ideas he touts, some of which would barely be recognized by many of those living in his old hometown. Say what? The people of Green Tree are sure to recognize the idea of 'freedom' and 'liberty.' That makes little sense. People in Green Tree today might not recognize a person's face from the neighborhood -- as he moved away in college, some 50 years ago. But the people are sure to understand and recognize what the IRS does and how it could go away. The people are sure to embrace many of Ron Paul's ideas -- and the all will be able to recognize the issues.

Quote: Cyberspace has long provided a home to those whose beliefs fall out of the mainstream. For those looking for a candidate to call their own, the Ron Paul message came floating by and they grabbed it in droves.

Ron Paul's message didn't come floating by. The message has roots in the American Revolution and Constitution. What went "floating by" -- was that plane that crashed in Shanksville, PA. I worry when talk of liberty and freedom is not made to be mainstream -- but only found on some remote edge of culture cyberspace efforts. Gosh. Terrorist and terror isn't the things that should be turned into the 'mainstream.'

From RonPaul

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

John K says: I have noticed that Ron Paul supporters, while they like to point to the Constitution, cannot support their position. They do not have any understanding of what the Constitution means.

cxx_guy said...

Can you support that position? I mean, sure, every political candidate has supporters that do not fully understand his platform, but it sounds like you think that Ron Paul has a larger percentage of supporters that fit that category. So tell me ... what does the constitution mean, and how have we gotten it wrong? Inquiring minds want to know.

Mark Rauterkus said...

John has been posting here on a regular basis and is trying to be a squeeky wheel.

Nothing else.

He knows it all too, so that is a big help. Sadly, few others know squat.

Ron Paul's trouble isn't that his supporters don't know the constitution -- it is that too many do. And, today's government is so far away from where it should be -- that there are many ways to wrestle it back in the right direction. Getting agreement on how to wrangle is the hardest part.

Anonymous said...

John K. says: No really. Ron Paul supporters have no idea of how the Constitution came to be, who wrote it, who sold it to the States etc. I was stunned. They see an ammendment and have no idea of the impact of that statement. They should at least be able to support their arguments if they are going to wrap themselves in the Constitution.

Tom Kawczynski said...

It was a positive article, but having done a twenty minute interview with the writer, I'm disappointed with what he chose to use. I thought I made a compelling argument for non-interventionism, using Somalia as a blueprint for why Darfur would be a terrible situation for us to enter, both for ourselves and the people on the ground.