Sept. 5, 2010
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) headlined a rally at San Francisco’s Civic Center Plaza Saturday to boost the candidacy of Republican John Dennis in his longshot bid to unseat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
An enthusiastic and liberty-minded crowd of 1,500 to 2,000 people welcomed Paul with cheers, sign-waving and generous applause as he urged San Francisco voters to remember the principles enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
Telling the crowd that the philosophy in Washington, D.C., has changed from our Founders’ vision of protecting people from government to government protecting people from themselves, Paul didn’t mince words. “That is very dangerous,” he said, emphasizing the threat to personal freedom and individual rights that has become so prevalent in Washington culture.
Articulating the common-sense message of his non-interventionist foreign policy philosophies, Paul scoffed at the idea being promoted by President Obama that the Iraq War is over. He said that Obama was merely continuing the ideologically flawed Bush Doctrine of “preventive war.”
“Preventive war doesn’t sound quite as bad as ‘aggression,’” Paul said, “but it’s aggression when you go and start wars and kill people because you don’t like them.” He reminded the crowd that many of the same people being targeted for assassination by Special Operations units in Afghanistan today were allies of the United States in the 1970s and 1980s, when they fought against and defeated more than 500,000 Soviet soldiers with material assistance from the U.S. Paul quoted poignant lyrics from 1960s singer-songwriter Phil Ochs and the legendary Buffy St. Marie as he drove his anti-war points home to the receptive crowd.
Weighing on the controversy over the proposed Islamic Cultural Center in New York City, Paul was adamant in his defense of property rights and the First Amendment right to freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Calling the entire media spectacle surrounding the proposed center “contrived,” Paul said that many of those who oppose it believed that if they could prevent it from being built, “that would mean Islam is guilty.”
Paul also sent a message of support to California voters who support Prop. 19, which would legalize marijuana in the state, by chastising government officials who think it is somehow their duty to monitor what individuals eat, drink or smoke.
And what Ron Paul speech would be complete without urging the crowd to learn more about the Federal Reserve? Paul has authored legislation to audit the Fed - something that is not only long overdue from an accounting standpoint but from the perspective of salvaging the U.S. economy as well.
Sporting a bright yellow shirt and looking fit and feisty as ever, Paul also spoke out against the so-called “bailout” of huge banks that practically held the government hostage with demands and threats in the last few months of the George W. Bush presidency.
“Who got hurt (in the bailout)?” Paul asked rhetorically. “The poor. Who got helped? The banks and the military-industrial complex.” Pelosi, it should be noted, was a staunch supporter of the Bush Bailout even though polls showed most San Franciscans opposed it – at least until the corporate media began pushing the Wall Street talking points that framed it as necessary to save the U.S. economy.
Speaking of corporate media, there was no sign of any reporters or photographers on hand from the city’s leading daily, the Hearst-owned San Francisco Chronicle. Instead of sending someone to cover the rally – held roughly a mile from the Chronicle’s San Francisco offices – the paper published this article on Page C-3 of its Sept. 5 edition instead. [CORRECTION: Earlier editions of this report said the Chronicle did not mention the rally at all; as anyone who reads the aforementioned story can see, Dennis himself mentions it in the interview. Punditty regrets the error and attributes the mistake to writing this report between midnight and 2 a.m. Corrected 9-6-10]
The other city daily, the Philip Anschutz-owned San Francisco Examiner, did publish an article on the event. Still, Punditty has to wonder where the reporter got his crowd estimate. During the middle of Paul’s speech, this reporter made a crowd estimate by stepping away and visually segmenting the area into quadrants of approximately 100 people, counting at least 17 such groupings. Perhaps the Examiner reporter made his crowd estimate early, but his estimate of a "few hundred activitst." was clearly low, as anyone who was there for Paul’s speech can attest.
While this report has focused mostly on former (and future?) presidential candidate Paul, the non-partisan “Principles Over Parties” rally also sought to raise awareness about Dennis. During his address to the crowd, the first-time candidate summed up his motivation for seeking office, saying “It’s all about you running your life, not the government running it for you.”
Additional photographs of the event can be viewed here.
Related Punditty Reports:
Ron Paul to attend S.F. anti-war rally, Aug. 31, 2010
Punditty offers midterm elections predictions: Pelosi's tenure as Speaker will end, Aug. 21, 2010
Midterm Election Fact Sheet, 1962-2010, Aug. 17, 2010
Read Punditty's bio on Allvoices.com.
Or add related content to this report
News Stories | Blogs | Images | Videos | Comments
While the anti-war sentiments and freedom of religion rights ring true with me, I am guarded against candidates who profess too much government and Libertaran ideals. From this article, I don't know his views on repealing health care legislation, immigration reform, or Progressive Libertarian proposals for movement toward a flat tax specifically; however, Libertarian views are predictable.
Ron Paul is a smart politician to sense the discontent with the war and will surely gather followers on that platform alone, but single platform candidates do not fair well over the long term, especially when they are forced by their constituency to voice where they stand in other areas of concern like social issues.
Thank you for your insightful comments.
I have some points of disagreement with Ron Paul -- I believe that we should strengthen Social Security through extending the FICA tax to incomes between $1 million and $25 million, for example (but at lower rates than the first $100,000 is taxed) -- but overall, his philosophy of "Sound Money" makes a lot more sense on many levels than the fiat currency the U.S. has been cranking out via the Federal Reserve over the last several decades.
You are right about single-issue candidates not faring well in the long run, but I don't really think of Paul as a single-issue candidate as much as I think of his as consistent in his approach to politics.
I think it began before the votes were even counted on Election Night 2008!
He favors letting prime issues like those be handled by the States rather than Washington. He also favors a flat tax and a removal of income tax. You have to read what these guys voted for to know that the universal stand is just limited government for all, constitutional liberty for the people.
Thank you for commenting. I agree with Paul that constitutional liberty is the best starting point for any kind of laws or policies.
End the Fed and God Bless Ron Paul!!
Flat tax is like some universal or agreed upon tax for goods, such as a sales tax or service tax. That's why it is called a "flat tax".
Dennis Kucinich has much the same idea. Replace the income tax with nothing. Let everyone else decide what to do with a "flat tax" and states whom do not want one, can vote to not have one.
Guess what, you are a slave to the US government through taxes, welfare etc. I own my house free and clear but the government can still take it if I don't pay my taxes or choose to seize it with some trumped up drug or other charges even before a trial. It's called confiscation. The US has more people per capita in jail than any other country in the world, look it up.
Thanks for commenting and thanks for the kind words about my wryting skills, uh, I mean "writing."
At any rate, I agree with Rosco1776 that the U.S. Government has expanded its powers far beyond the scope of the Constitution. I am not opposed to taxes per se, but I am opposed to taxation without representation -- and I think that is what has been happening in the United States to some degree since at least the age of Woodrow Wilson.
I think you are making a judgment about the Founders that applies 21st century hindsight to the contemporary issues faced by the colonists. Of course no one in his or her right mind wants to go back to treating minorities and women as second-class citizens, but when I look at the Founding Fathers I see people who were truly moving toward liberty and justice for all rather than continuing the oppressive status quo of the era.
What I would like to see is Constitutional *principles* applied to contemporary *policies.* That, I think, would be a good guide for progress on all fronts - economic, sociological and even spiritual. And so much more.
Most of us are proposing to restore constitutional law and authority as implied in the Constitution, using that as our guide and litmus test. It would apply to our modern age society in more ways than one, giving most people the freedom of choice first and foremost. And never reverting to slavery or taxation based systems like they used on the farms either. We might have taxes but I think its a fair bet that between each of our states, we could pretty much see what are the best taxes to keep. It's all about those constitutional issues which made us great.
I agree with Rosco1776