We the constituents of the Ron Paul Bury Brigade swear to bury every Ron Paul-related article on the basis that this man is a lunatic. Digg has had enough of the constant advertisements that keep encouraging people to donate to Ron Paul.
---
Ron Paul will reverse federal decisions dating nearly all the way back to the founding of the United States (going back to the argument of First Bank of the United States) that have superceded the Constitution. Many diggers think this is a good thing, but he even has the potential to nullify the Civil Rights Act in his name of states' rights. And there is a good reason to believe that he will. It should be noted that he is a strong opponent of hate crime laws. In the name of "states' rights," he would willingly reverse federal laws that prevent hate crime. He has vetoed even Civil Rights legislation in his states' rights delusion. In 2004, Rep. Paul was the only member of Congress to vote against commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He has also opposed the renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. All this because of states' rights and the Constitution, which he doesn't even interpret correctly. Why doesn't he just try and seperate the fifty states into fifty seperate nations?
What this means, for those without the historical background to understand (Paul supporters), is that Ron Paul would essentially undo all federal civil rights law since Brown v. Board of Ed. All the federal court rulings, legislation, programs, rules, enforcement policies, etc. relating to the protection of civil rights. He just doesn't believe that the federal government should get involved.
Ironically, Paul's dream world could not come into being without undoing so much constitutional law as to totally upset the Constitution he's allegedly defending. Of course, there is no danger that this could occur in the real world. The rule of law, stare decisis, and the good will and common sense of the electorate would never allow President Paul (pause for laughter) to succeed in undoing our civil rights laws. But it is an important object lesson in how dangerous a little knowledge is. Paul, in protecting a fictional Constitution of his imagination, would destroy the real Constitution. That would be very dangerous indeed.
Ron Paul's libertarian policies are unrealistic and do not benefit you (the common man). Laissez-faire is accepted by a very small percentage of people, particularly the Austrian school of economics and libertarians. Laissez-faire can only worsen conditions for the working people.
And it's even scarier is that people do not know that this man does not even adhere to the Constitution. He would piss on the seperation of Church and state and ignore the first amendment of the Constitution. Don't believe me? Take a look at this.