Why Not Ron Paul?

Before I get into this, allow me to say that there is much to like about Ron Paul.  I can say without irony that Washington needs Ron Paul.  Paul knows the Constitution better than many politicians — most, in fact. 

I also believe Ron Paul shouldn’t be allowed within 100 yards of the Presidency of the United States.

Allow me to explain.

What’s Right With Paul?
I have a book, published in 1992, called The Next Four Years: A Vision of Victory.  The book is a collection of speeches given in New Orleans, September of 1992.  It is an introduction to the US Taxpayer’s party, a primer on the Presidential candidacy of Taxpayer’s Party nominee Howard Phillips, and a book with which I philosophically agree without reservation.  In this book, Dr. Ron Paul presents a speech, titled “True Common Law,” which is a scathing indictment of government waste and beaurocratic foolishness.  In citing his previous term as a legislator, Paul says, “instead of endorsing more government, I actually came to the conclusion that there was there was more waste and corruption, that nothing deserved passage.”

Certainly, this seems like somebody I could get behind.

So, why not Ron?
The major piece of Paul’s platform that puts him in opposition to the couple other true conservatives in this race and, notably, my choice, Fred Thompson, is his fanatical opposition to the war.  Now, I’m not a drooling warmonger.  I don’t like war.  I can certainly understand somebody’s opposition at this point, though I would disagree.  Furthermore, Paul’s brand of international non-intervention has a nice ring to it, and is definitely tempting.

But here’s the thing.  Though Paul suggests the war was “sold” using faulty information, he voted against it, even then.  In other words, when the entire Legislature was convinced that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and presented a credible threat to the United States, Ron Paul voted to ignore the threat.

Whether or not there was a threat — whether the information was valid, old, invented — is academic and beside the point.  I’m not talking about the Dem-copyrighted BushLied scenario — it simply doesn’t matter.  The fact is, the governmen believed there was a credible threat.  It was based on this belief that the government chose war.  And Ron Paul chose duck and cover.  The reasonable conclusion, then, is that as President, presented with this same information, Ron Paul would choose to wait it out — to see whether a shot was fired — to wait until Americans were killed before acting.

Well, as an American, I don’t like Americans being killed.  When our enemies have weapons, I want them dealt with.  When we have reasonable, credible evidence that our enemies might intend to do us harm, I want a President who will authorize a strike — not adopt a “wait and see” policy that could end American lives.

It is for this reason that I cannot, in good conscience — and will not — support a Ron Paul presidency.  There are other reasons, but they are peripheral to this one important point.

Ron Paul Supporters
I have made no secret of the fact that I don’t like Ron Paul supporters, for the most part.  While it’s fair to say that the vitriol, ugliness and ignorance of many Paul supporters has done the Paul campaign no small disservice, if I used the smallness of some supporters to make my decisions, I would never have become a Christian.  Which is to say, such idiocy played no role in my decision to not support Paul.  In my travels across the blogosphere, I have come across many of these individuals, and of those people, have met exactly one supporter who was intelligent, articulate and respectful.  He was, in fact, the first Paul supporter to grace my blog, and, unlike most Ron Paul supporters, was thoughtful and actually contributed to the conversation.  This message is not to that person.

I don’t mind dialogue.  I like it, in fact.  And, while I find the small-minded commentary by many Ron Paul supporters to be amusing, I just don’t want to waste a bunch of space devoted to it.  So, I will allow exactly two stupid comments on this blog at one time.  As I get more (if I get more… this is a pretty small blog, after all), I will begin deleting earlier moronic posts in favor of newer ones.  Just a fair advisory.



11 Responses to “Why Not Ron Paul?”

  1. I think you would appreciate reading Questions That Won’t Be Asked, by Ron Paul on Sept. 10, 2002 to get a good picture of where Ron was coming from. I agree though, Ron does not support pre-emptive strikes.


  2. I have similar concerns. Consider this though. Being a U.S. Rep., Paul is privy to far more intelligence than you or I. This includes CIA ops, foreign aid expenditures, and intl chatter. It is possible that he knew Saddam had to be taken out for other reasons than WMD. I do not want to get into middle-eastern and Zionist conspiracy-land, but Paul could have voted his conscience knowing the advanced reasons were a front. Anyways, good post.

  3. Dear Streu,

    I find your logic in not wanting to support Ron Paul wanting. Perhaps members of the US government believed that the US was threatened by Iraq in 2003 — perhaps. However, it was abundantly clear to me, to millions of other Americans, and many millions of others around the world, that the US was most obviously NOT threatened in any way by Iraq. Speaking for myself, I felt at the time as I imagine a German of good conscience would have felt in 1939 as Hitler used trumped-up and ridiculous reasons to invade Poland. I’m sure the German government convinced many good Germans that Poland was a threat to Germany in 1939 as well, but that does not justify what happened then either.

  4. Paul has said over and over he’s not for pre-emptive strikes. In any circumstance. While I agree that, as a Congressman, he may have been privvy to more intelligence, I think it’s irrelevent to who he is as a politician. He’s pretty vocal about his “wait and see” attitude. While some Americans don’t like pre-emptive strikes, I personally have not a single problem with them. I prefer assassination, actually, but until we dump the moronic UN, that’s not really a possibility.

  5. Dear Alan,

    I’m sorry, I know I was not addressed here, but you have to be kidding right. Are you really comparing Germany’s invasion of Poland and other surrounding nations, to America’s invasion of Iraq. Hitler marched through making himself the leader of all he conquered, we take daily causalities on our side protecting the civilians and trying to maintain a democratically elected government. Trumped up or not 95% of the government and the majority of the informed nation backed the idea of going to war. We tried to avoid war, practically begged Saddam to allow our weapon inspectors in to look around and he refused. Had the intelligence been correct Bush may have been looked at the greatest leader of our time, things however turned out differently. Instead he left the door wide open for the Anti American, the uneducated and the generally misinformed to attack our actions in protecting ourselves.

  6. Just FYI for all those non-believers out there. I am a Gulf-War vet and my unit found HUGE BUNKERS full of chemical weapons and chemical weapon delivery systems (like 122mm Soviet-made rockets). Now, since then, I dont know where they (the Iraqis) hid the stuff, but the weapons WERE there. I saw them. Since then, the VA has informed everyone in my unit that we “may have been” subjected to chemical weapons and offered everyone a “free” physical to look for any lasting symptoms. Also, there is documented evidence that Sadam used chemical weapons to wipe out entire Kurdish villages. If it walks, talks, and acts like a duck…it is a duck.

  7. No one thought there was a credible threat to the US from Iraq. Even in the CIA, only the OSP (which was setup by the executive) agreed with the intelligence. Congress was never shown anything that would lead them to believe there was a threat. A couple of satellite pictures of trucks don’t constitute a threat.

  8. Ron Paul did not vote to ignore the threat. He clearly was against a pre-emptive strike and pushed to have the Congress declare war as required by the Constitution. The fact that we have not declared war since WWII is a little absurd in that we have been continuously engaged all around the world in a military fashion that at times really resembles war. If you don’t agree with his stance on pre-emptive strikes, then so be it, that’s fine with me. But all of us, in my opinion, should at least expect the Congress to do its job required by the Constitution. If we are going to be in a war (or wars) then lets do it the right way and declare war. Ron Paul, as president, would not ignore Congress if they declared war – he would do his duty as Commander in Cheif and carry out a legally declared war.

  9. All three of the top Democrats running have said that there is no way they could or would pull the troops out of Iraq until their second term in 2013. That is insane…

    It is not only Iraq though. Paul wants to pull troops out across the world.

    The U.S. population is only 1/25 of the world’s population, yet we spend 80% of the entire world’s military budget.

    We have troops in 130 different countries!


    We still have 50,000 troops in Japan! 40,000 troops in Korea! 30,000 + in Germany! This is insanity and it is bankrupting America!

    Down with the military-industrial complex!

    Go Ron Paul!

    Champion of the Constitution!



  10. Wow, Its just like you said in the blog.

  11. I agree with ambrose7. This is my first encounter with Paul supporters…hopefully my last.

    Any group that aligns themselves with the folks who think we shot down United 93, imploded the WTC and hit the Pentagon with a missile….I will steer clear of.

    Outstanding blog though!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: