Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Ron Paul: God wants small government and no Fed

By CAPITOL HILL BLUE Staff Reports
December 10, 2011

Ron Paul

In Ron Paul‘s view of the world, God wants limited government and elimination of the Federal Reserve.

That’s right.  The twice-failed Presidential candidate — once as a Libertarian and later as a Republican — says he finds his anti-government beliefs rooted in scripture, not politics.

While some might find it a stretch to see God as a strict Constitutionalist, Paul finds a way to link most of his beliefs to his Christian faith.

“Ron Paul is, first and foremost, a right-wing religious zealot,” a long-time GOP political consultant tells Capitol Hill Blue.  “That is key to his hardcore, almost cult-like followers.”

According to Chris Moody at The Ticket, a close look at Paul’s campaign will find it littered with Christian conservatives and right-wing religious activists. His Iowa campaign director, Michael Heath, came from the anti-gay Christian Civic League of Maine, which fought against adding sexual orientation to the state’s human right act.

Paul has a long history of opposing gay marriage.  Moody also cites The Iowa Poll, conducted by the Des Moines Register, which found 17 percent feel Paul is “the most socially conservative candidate” in the upcoming caucuses.  Only Michelle Bachmann polls higher among the right wing.

Paul hopes his extreme right-wing positions play well in Iowa where 64 percent of likely voters oppose gay marriage and abortion.

Yet while Paul polls well on those hot button issues, it is former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich — who is considered the most “socially conservative” by just 10 percent in the recent Iowa Poll — who leads the polls in Iowa.

Why?  Because while Paul courts the right with his right-wing stands on gay rights and abortion, he runs counter to those who want Constitutional amendments to enforce those views.

Family Leader, a leading conservative group in Iowa, removed Paul’s name from a list of candidates for endorsement.

Family Leader boss Bob Vander Platts, says the group sees no reason to support him.

“He’s right on the sanctity of human life but he’s wrong when he believes it is a states’ rights issue,” Vander Platts says.  “Such important issues should not be left up to the states.”

In debates and interviews, Paul quotes the bible as foundations for his economic policies and conservative beliefs, Moody notes.

(Editor’s Note: The original version of this article did not include proper attribution to source material.  It has been edited to reflect that.)

Enhanced by Zemanta

22 Responses to Ron Paul: God wants small government and no Fed

  1. Bill Cravener

    December 10, 2011 at 7:51 am

    Paul’s simply another nut wanting to be king.

  2. Blazer Joe

    December 10, 2011 at 9:08 am

    As I recall, our constitution and the bill of rights were based on morals, the bible, and god. So if he is a strict constitutionalist, I say he is championing the foundations under which it was written.

    I believe that Roman Catholicism is the most common religion in the world, and if your look into Catholic Social Teaching, you will see how it is also an advocate of small government. This is evident by the Papal Encyclicals and other documents written throughout history, and till this very day. Thus he might be right in saying the world wants smaller Government.

  3. Watchman

    December 10, 2011 at 10:22 am

    God should speak for himself, and not let all these people play politics on his behalf.

  4. Sandune

    December 10, 2011 at 11:19 am

    God is not mentioned in the Constitution and apparently Ron Paul is pandering to the religious right. Well, Dr. Paul, you can keep your God and I will pass you up as a candidate. Your belief in Creation over Evolution kept you out of the last election. Not all voting Americans believe in any God and it is a mistake to think we can be bought by occult superstition.

    I may have to vote for a Democrat for the first time in my long life. What a shame that the GOP cannot separate the church and state. They have sold out on all their individual freedom agenda that was part of their organization.

    What else will God say when it comes to our declaring more wars on this planet? Will our Christian leaders continue their war against Islam?

    My great grandfather, my grandfather, my husband and my son all served in our American armed services and they did not serve to protect God, but to protect the U.S. Constitution that protects Americans.

  5. Carl Nemo **==

    December 10, 2011 at 12:35 pm

    Who cares what divine entities are invoked for championing smaller government. Our government is a bloated, inefficient, freedom destroying parasite that’s slowly, but surely, killing its host organism; I.E., “We the People”. Believe it…! : |

    Carl Nemo **==

  6. Bill Cravener

    December 10, 2011 at 1:02 pm

    Our legislators (most of them Republicans) who received an average 80 percent approval rating or higher from the leading religious-right organizations make up more than 40 percent of the U.S. Congress. These politicians include some of the most powerful figures in the U.S. government, as well as key environmental decision makers. Because of its power as a voting bloc the christian right has the ear and souls of much of the nation’s leadership. And you wonder what the hells wrong with this country. It’s like half this country wants to guide our ship America by some imaginary god. Nuts!!

  7. Almandine

    December 10, 2011 at 1:10 pm

    Odd… how a person can propound political positions that are based on individual dignity and freedom, which are thusly in the best interests of the citizenry, but be labeled extremist, or zealot, or right-wing because his positions are based on the most common social doctrine held in this country… i.e., belief in religion.

    Check it out – Wiki will do… fully 83% of Americans profess religious beliefs, with about 90% of those being Christian. Of course religions have many different tenets, but most fall closely in line with what Paul uses as his personal “guidance”… love thy neighbor and stay out of his business. (Vander Plaats could use a good dose of that medicine.)

    What is interesting in this regard is the notion that Libertarianism is a right-wing belief system, when in fact it comes from the same root term as “liberal”, although both terms harken back at least decades to the original intent, which was aimed toward individualism, both socially and economically. Today, the term Liberal has been infused with great gobs of societal and governmental control.

    What is alsinteresting in this regard is that NO President has ever claimed to be agnostic or athiest. In fact, all but the current Communist in the WH attended services regularly.

  8. Sandune

    December 10, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    Carl, you know the agenda from the religious right. I, of course want a smaller more efficient government but not at the cost of individual freedoms. These people want to promise fewer laws but not when it comes to gays marrying, women choosing the size of their family and forcing terminal patients to live in agony when they plead to be allowed to die.

    “Under God” leaves no room for individual choices in our personal lives. The states have that option and the bible belt has their own rules for salvation. Many of us have worked very hard to get your state’s choice of a dignified death on the ballot. That is all I can do and the choice is up to you.

    You elected the congress that bloated the entire mess. You also have the choice of electing others who want to keep the parasite out of our lives. We do it one congress-member at a time.

    I am relieved that Ron Paul finally admitted his source of decisions. His God will never be mine.

  9. woody188

    December 10, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    What Mr. Hilton is stating is that Ron Paul doesn’t like abortion and gay marriage personally, but refuses to force his religious views on others via Federal laws?

    Isn’t that something Americans should want in a leader that champions personal freedoms over state control?

    According to Mr. Hilton, a separation of church and state is “extreme right-wing” and “cult-like?”

    And unlike your unnamed source, I’ve found most Ron Paul supporters to be some of the most secular Republicans around. One can’t share Libertarian views and insist on codifying religion into law. The two are diametrically opposed.

    Take a look at ANY Republican campaign and you are bound to find Christian Conservatives. That doesn’t mean they want to force you to church every Sunday or make personal choices for everyone.

    Personally I and my wife would never get an abortion, but that does not mean we will stop anyone else from getting one. One must make ones own choices, right or wrong. It is not for us to judge. Satan forces people into submission.

    Not all Christians believe as such but a vast majority do. That is why we have over 80% of our country that believe in God and Christ but very few would force those beliefs on people. Most of us just want to be left alone to live our lives in peace.

    I’m sorry Mr. Hilton, but you’ve lost any sort of respect you might have had with this obviously contrived hit piece.

    • Bill Cravener

      December 10, 2011 at 3:55 pm

      “I’m sorry Mr. Hilton, but you’ve lost any sort of respect you might have had with this obviously contrived hit piece.”

      I assume you are referring to yourself personally? I assure you your feelings are not mine.

    • Editor

      December 10, 2011 at 7:43 pm

      You know, just the other day I was warning Don:

      You better be careful. You keep writing these things about Ron Paul and you just might lose Woody’s respect. If that happens, I just don’t know what we’ll do. We may have to shut this place down. I mean, without Woody’s respect, how can we go on?

      But you know Don. Just doesn’t listen ;)

      • woody188

        December 11, 2011 at 1:08 am

        First, Bill Cravener, I would never presume to speak for you. I don’t typically remember you exist. You’re just a name online where men are boys, women are men, and boys are FBI.

        Second, all sarcasm aside, I’d think the editor of a non-blog would frown on unnamed sources used to smear Presidential candidates as radical extremists. Are you journalists, or bloggers?

        Obviously I’m not the gatekeeper of journalistic integrity. But I am finding it hard to reconcile Mr. Hilton’s claims because they defy simple logic. Paul might find support for his political beliefs in scripture or from a pulpit. That doesn’t make him a religious zealot.

        To put it bluntly, this piece doesn’t pass the sniff test. If this was a newspaper, I’d use this article to wipe my rear end.

        Ron Paul articles get many more comments and browser views. That’s why they keep penning them. Ultimately, clicks translate into dollars. Negative Paul articles might bring in more traffic than the positive ones. But that doesn’t give the writer or the editor the right to misrepresent and slander the man.

        And that is the point. Only a weak minded idiot would believe Paul is a religious zealot. Anyone that has actually looked into the man’s candidacy knows he is anything but a religious zealot. Perhaps a Constitutional zealot, but not a religious one!

        I’d say the same thing if you said this about Newt, or Obama, or just about anyone that is obviously not a religious zealot. I would accuse Newt of using religious zealots to get votes.

        So what is the point? Is it to keep the weak minded from even considering Paul? Or is it all about the clicks and money? Either way, you guys are wrong on this one and probably owe him an apology and a retraction…if you aren’t a blog.

        • Almandine

          December 11, 2011 at 1:19 am

          Seems you hit a nerve there, Woody… and deservedly so.

          • woody188

            December 11, 2011 at 1:38 am

            I’m not defending Paul. I’m defending journalism. I thought that was what we could expect at CHB. Guess I might as well read the Times or the Post.

            • Bill Cravener

              December 11, 2011 at 5:46 am

              Dislike the author’s opinion (and mine) but just can’t stay away can you? I find it humorous how easily christians get bent out of shape. :)

              • William C. Watkins

                December 11, 2011 at 6:31 am

                I suspect the only nerves hit here belong to Mr. Woody and Mr. Almandine, both of whom seem to take themselves all too seriously, a trait I find typical of Ron Paul supporters. The editor was obviously poking fun at Mr. Woody’s belief that Mr. Hilton or the management of this web site really cared if they had his “respect” or met his standards of journalism which are obviously measured by a yardstick that says either you support Ron Paul or you are a bad journalist.

                Is it not also odd that those who level criticism at news stories that used unnamed sources so often do so behind the anonymity of screen names that hide their own identities? The Internet is overrun with such hypocrisy and ridden with self-proclaimed media critics.

                (Edited by The Editor)

  10. Danny Adams

    December 10, 2011 at 2:21 pm

    >>“Such important issues should not be left up to the states.”<<

    Translated, "We hate Big Government, except when we don't."

  11. Sandune

    December 10, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    When my ancestors migrated to the new world it was to get away from nations run on religious convictions. My father’s family were Catholics and left Scotland for their ability to be Catholics in the new world. My mother’s family were getting in to a new Christian faith that was shunned in Wales. My dauther’s inlaws ran from Austria when Hitler started killing the Jews. They all headed for America which was the land of the free!

    At the age of 9 I became a devout Atheist realizing the division that all these Gods inflicted on many Americans. I sometimes want to declare a warning to anyone who believes that America is free…..We are not free unless we are willing to live under a rapid growth of Evangelical Fundamentalists.

    Being a Democracy does not mean that the majority of the citizens are free to destroy the freedoms of our millions of gay Americans. It does not automatically put Christians in authority over our governmemt laws when they try to change our Bill of Rights into something out of the new testamemt.

    Had I known of the danger that followed Bush 43 into power, I would not have simply worked against him but I would have moved my family away from the danger of this never ending series of wars to destroy Islam.

    When ever Christians carry the majority of the government in any nation, it ends up in the Christian Right taking over the government and adding laws pertaining only to the religious right. My God, where you people after WW2 when America was under siege from the Birch Society? Have any of you read of the Christian assault on Europe when the nation’s governments were under the thumb of the Inquisitions? Are you waiting for television to do a series called “Dancing With the Inquisitors?”

    Are you so damn weak that you need a Christian government to tell you what not to do? Just look at who the religious right is backing; the most corrupt man ever thrown out of the Government.

    Do you really want a lying adulterous first lady? Is there no class left in the Republican Party at this time? Christians have no need for right over wrong. Well, I phucking do!

  12. Gregg

    December 10, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    Well, since Paul has apparently joined the ranks of those God speaks directly to. Seems like to me Paul would have at least pointed out to God he, she, it needs to whisper the solution in everybody’s ear.

    Would that change the way people vote or deal with a runaway government? Probably not, people just want miracles not solutions.

  13. Editor

    December 12, 2011 at 1:37 am

    We’ve noticed an increase in nastiness and personal attacks in the comments section and, for that reason, have suspended the posting rights of some who abuse the privilege of commenting on this web site.

    Remember that while we encourage debate, we will not tolerate personal attacks, obscenities or insults.

  14. Hal Brown

    December 12, 2011 at 11:13 am

    Good going editor. I may chide you for not having memorized a The A.P. or NYT style book, and I hope you take that in the spirit that I am sometimes a picky dyspeptic a-hole.

    There is no place for some of the rude comments displayed above.

    Keep up the good work, Hal

  15. eve

    December 18, 2011 at 11:15 pm

    Ron Paul may be religious. That is his right in this country at this current moment.
    I may not agree with his views on religion BUT I totally agree with his non-interventionist, pro-constitution, America-first approach.

    Unlike the dual-citizens and their lackeys who put Israel before the US at every chance they get, Ron Paul puts the US first.

    The US Constitution was created NOT to give us rights BUT to limit government as to what they are capable of inflicting on the populace.

    Sadly, the populace are ignorant of their rights and what the US Constitution was created to limit/protect.

    Ron Paul is the only candidate I have seen thus far who doesn’t want to trample American liberty and pass bills to limit liberty.
    He also does not want to send your sons, daughters and neighbors overseas to be blown to bits by an IED for no good reason.
    The ONLY one……

    And somehow in 2011 it’s a bad thing to want liberty AND safety?
    Somehow it’s a bad thing to want a currency backed by something?
    You can have both, it’s only the powers that be who try to convince us otherwise on a daily basis.

    Most Americans (or American’ts) are more screwed up than a football bat.