I've been spending quite a bit of time at Ron Paul's archives hosted at www.lewrockwell.com. There are a lot of articles there, all written by Ron Paul with the majority being his responses to specific bills in congress. Of course we have the old favorites such as his response to Lawrence V. Texas, or his calls to end birthright citizenship. But if you look closer you will find that these archives are a whole treasure trove of crazy.
Take for example his stand against the North American Highway and his fight to protect America from the coming North American Union.
This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and up through Kansas City. Offshoots would connect the main artery to the west coast, Florida, and northeast. Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside.
This will require coordinated federal and state eminent domain actions on an unprecedented scale, as literally millions of people and businesses could be displaced. The loss of whole communities is almost certain, as planners cannot wind the highway around every quaint town, historic building, or senior citizen apartment for thousands of miles.
Strong words by a brave man. Except none of it is actually true.
Ron Paul also explains how the Federal Government has no authority to be involved in the abortion debate.
Under the 9th and 10th amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid.Of course he is ignoring that pesky little 14th Amendment but hey state's rights and all that. Now I know a lot of Paultards are pro-choice but let's look at why exactly Ron Paul would want to remove the federal government from the abortion debate. Hey, looks like he answers that question right here.
Once we accepted the federalization of abortion law under the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, we lost the ability to apply local community standards to ethical issues. It is much more difficult for pro-life advocates to win politically at the federal level. Those who seek a pro-life culture must accept that we will never persuade 300 million Americans to agree with us. Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. A pro-life culture can be built only from the ground up, person by person. For too long we have viewed the battle as purely political, but no political victory can change a degraded culture. A pro-life culture must arise from each of us as individuals, not by the edict of an amoral federal government.Of course you also have to ignore all those bills he proposed. Or his voting record.
Even the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, which is an integral part of the current pro-life agenda, presents a dilemma. While I have always supported this Act and plan to do so in the future, I realize that it raises questions of federalism because authority over criminal law is constitutionally retained by the statesWe will end this update with one more article. In this one Ron Paul truly stands up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. I am talking of course about David Koresh.
Of course this is not the first time Ron Paul has taken a heroic stand against the Federal Government. When talking about famous income tax Ed and Elaine Brown, Ron said,
People who point this out and fight the tax code and fight the monetary code are heroic. I compare them to people like Gandhi, who's willing to speak out and try to bring about change in a peaceful manner; Martin Luther King fought laws that were unfair and unjust, and he suffered, too.