Ron Paul

I’m not in the habit of plugging any particular political candidate, unless of course I happen to be down at the local watering hole discussing politics with a few friends. I will however, often be heard chipping my teeth about some political idiot or other who has aroused my ire, at which time I have to be careful of loosing my temper and excessively raising my blood pressure. So, to keep my Doctor from getting overly concerned about my well being, I won’t have much to say about the political stance of the current Democratic presidential hopefuls, nor most of the Republican candidates either. It happens that I’m one of that vast multitude of independent voters in this country who generally don’t follow any particular party line. As so many other people claim, I like to think that I’m a political moderate, with fairly strong conservative leanings. Unlike many people in this country, I try to keep current on the issues and the various candidates’ position. When the candidates begin their political speeches you’ll generally find me over in the corner someplace, probably with a woebegone expression on my face, and most likely shaking my head in disgust. If however, the speaker is advocating infringement of my constitutional rights, or yet another scheme to bring on socialism, you’ll generally find me loudly screaming protests from atop my soapbox.

Today however I’m going to make a few comments about 72 year old Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, one of the Republican presidential hopefuls, who, contrary to most mainstream press reports, appears to be highly popular with many voters, and is conducting a rather unusual but highly effective campaign. It’s hard to say just what his political leaning actually is, essentially a mix of libertarian and constitutionalist ideas, and a bit of republicanism mixed in. Essentially a pariah to the GOP caucus, Rep Paul, who was the 1988 Libertarian presidential candidate, does not hew to the party line, and thus is not a “good” republican worthy of party support. Interestingly enough he has gone from being a “nut” to a “nonentity” to a “fringe” to a “second tier” candidate in an amazingly short time, and he doesn’t appear to be slowing down a bit. During the early presidential debates last spring, leading GOP candidates treated Congressman Paul a bit like a libertarian nut. He was someone to be tolerated or mocked - and even the moderators acted like he was a distraction to endure until they could ask the big guns important questions. The media initially treated him like an interesting oddball, but an oddball nonetheless. Why? Because alone among the Republican candidates, Paul is strongly against the war in Iraq and is highly critical of American military presence anywhere in the Middle East. Of course I might point out that an “ignore him” strategy is not entirely out of fashion either. At least it’s apparently in vogue at MSNBC which wrote their headlines to deny Ron Paul the credit for another straw poll victory. The poll in question was at the recent Nevada Conservative Leadership Conference held in Sparks. In this, Ron Paul didn’t show up in person to shake hands, but he clearly finished first in the poll, while GOP front-runner Mitt Romney did appear, and finished a poor second. The MSNBC article is entitled "ROMNEY LOSES NV STRAW POLL" rather than "Ron Paul Wins NV Straw Poll", and while it mentions Paul’s win exactly once, eighty percent of the article is devoted to Romney. As one Internet commentator put it, "the resulting comments from Ron Paul supporters are priceless."

Attacks on candidate Paul are part of a trend toward belittling him and his constitutionalist message now that ignoring him hasn't worked - as he regularly continues to win straw polls and raise even more funds. The influx of money has helped Paul make his first TV ad in New Hampshire, a luxury several second-tier Republican candidates have yet to indulge in. And he's clearly found a following - if not among Republican voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, then among an apparently widespread and rapidly growing coalition of “old style” conservatives, constitutionalists, disgruntled republicans, the libertarian right, and (perhaps) many of the anti-war left. Like Howard Dean in 2004, Paul has a huge following on the Internet and draws tons of traffic to his websites. He raised $5 million during the third quarter of 2007, giving him more money in the bank than John McCain. Now he's stunned Republican frontrunners by ringing up $4.3 million in donations during a one-day Internet fundraiser. Much like John Kennedy’s revolutionary use of television in 1960, Ron Paul seems to have discovered the political use of the Internet.

But his ideas are definitely catching on with many voters who are totally disgusted with “Republicrat” politics as usual. Here's what Paul said when asked about Republicans and the war: "Republicans have been conservative and anti-war and picked up the pieces when Democrats get us into trouble. It's a constitutional and conservative position. I don't feel out of place ... It discourages me that Republicans aren't open-minded enough to look at their history and look at a traditional Republican conservative position. Because they are going to lose another election if they don't...“ But while Paul's anger over Iraq has generated the headlines, it's his views on other core conservative Republican issues that may be fuelling his success. Paul is, as it happens, also firmly anti-abortion, pro-gun, and anti-NAFTA. He believes the freedoms and liberties of Americans have been threatened by the White House, and cites the Patriot Act as a particular danger. He favors a return to the gold standard, and a drastically reduced federal government that would be primarily responsible for defending America from outside attack and not a heck of a lot else. In a Ron Paul administration - au revoir Federal Reserve, Internal Revenue Service, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Education. No one really expects that a new President can wave a magic wand and change policies that have been existent for years, in some cases even before the New Deal was foisted on the American people. It’s hoped what will happen is that a new congress, supporting a Paul administration, will slowly turn the ship of state back to its Constitutional roots and the Republic will be restored. Hard to believe? What’s even more unbelievable is that the American people should allow “politics as usual” to continue eroding the American way of life, and destroying U.S. sovereignty, by supporting candidates from the Republican or Democratic parties that are, in reality, nothing more than another set of puppet mouthpieces for globalized corporate campaign contributors and special interests.

There's been plenty of tangible evidence to Paul’s appeal. He finished third in a recent straw poll at the "Values Voters" convention in Washington - ahead of Fred Thompson, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. And he's got a strong following among economic conservatives furious with President Bush's big-spending habits over the past seven years. It may be that Paul's supporters are not concentrated enough to help in the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3rd. But he's dangerous enough that Republican insiders are worried, for his widespread followers are numerous, very vocal, intensely motivated, and quite easily stirred up.

One comment I recently read from the “Ron Paul Revolution” that I particularly liked is - “Americans have had enough. We're going to reclaim our country. Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.”