What can you get for a trillion bucks? Or make that $1.6 trillion, if you take the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as tallied by the majority staff of Congress’s Joint Economic Committee (JEC). Or is it the $3.5-trillion figure cited by Ron Paul, whose concern about the true cost of this war for ordinary Americans shames the leading Democrats, who prattle on about needed domestic programs that will never find funding because of future war-related government debt?
I’ll be honest with you; I detest just about everything Ron Paul stands for. Sure, he’s an out-of-the-closet nutjob, but in a field of GOP candidates focusing on who can get their war on most convincingly, Paul at least has the moral courage and the intellectual honesty to demand that the clusterf—k in Iraq end now.
What amazes me are the numbers of normally clear-thinking individuals who not only support Paul, they’ve donate a ton of money to him. Hmm…for some reason, the phrase “pouring money down a rathole” comes to mind. I wonder why so many people are willing to ignore the totality of Paul’s ideology? I do find it interesting that, given that there’s no way the GOP will allow Ron Paul to be their standard-bearer in 2008, Paul has nonetheless managed to raise any absolutely obscene amount of money for a fringe candidate. Clearly, the people who are donating see something that they want to believe in. Perhaps it’s a Republican with a degree of moral courage, or the willingness to tell the party faithful what they need to hear, if not always what they want to hear. What’s even more interesting is what they’re choosing to ignore.
Still and all, I keep returning to the reality that Ron Paul is a Republican. Some of his views are so “out there”, so beyond the pale, that it’s not difficult to understand why the GOP hierarchy is so determined to sink Paul’s candidacy. Though many Paul supporters are True Believers and probably not capable of admitting to this reality, Paul’s campaign is riding on a wave of well-heeled (and some not so well-heeled) zealots who could only charitably be described as being on the outer fringe of the American polity. Sure, it might be nice to think about “What if…?”, but the reality is that Ron Paul has about as much chance of being elected President as I do Queen of England. Trust me; you do NOT want to see me in a tiara.
In the end, we’ll be left with the same choice we’ve always had: two candidates- normally rich, White males- who, ideologically speaking, aren’t really all that far apart. OK, so perhaps this time around, the Democrats will put forth a woman or an African-American male, but the end result may well be the same. It would be nice to think that someone, perhaps even Ron Paul, might bring an element of honesty to the 2008 campaign, but…nah….
In the final analysis, Ron Paul is still a Republican, and except for his stance on the war in Iraq, his views are even more distasteful than most of the other Republican candidates. Yes, you can talk about integrity all you want- and you might have a point- but Paul is still a Republican who is seriously out of touch with the views of the vast majority of the American sheeple.
Why are so many willing to delude themselves into thinking that Ron Paul is a fresh alternative to the current thug in the White House? Well, it might help to keep in mind that the American sheeple have been thoroughly propagandized for their protection. Ron Paul is no more the answer than is Tom Tancredo or Mike Huckabee.
It’s about time y’all faced reality. A vote for a Republican candidate- any candidate- is a vote for the status quo ante. It doesn’t get much simpler than that.
Heads up, y’all. Bob should be leaving a comment in 4…3…2….
According to this recent article in the Washington Post:
When you say the word libertarian few people identify with it and some conjure up images of nut jobs and tin foil hats. This conditioned response has been propagated by democrats and republicans. The symbiotic two party duopoly doesn't play well with others. They like a polarized electorate that can only choose between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.
But when you poll people about libertarian ideology without actually using the label, it seems between 10% and 20% identify with it.
This is the basis of the attraction to Ron Paul's message of freedom, liberty and prosperity. It appeals to independents as well as democrats and republicans (at least the ones who aren't knuckle dragging bible thumpers.)
The message does not appeal to power hungry professional politicians and the army of parasites that depend on our rigged-game political industry for a living. Both the RNC and the DNC are scared $#!tless over Ron Paul because he brings an element of uncertainty to their two party game that they don't quite know how to handle. The last thing they want is a campaign that actually focuses on issues instead of sound bytes and rhetoric.
I strongly disagree with Ron Paul's philosophy on abortion and equal treatment of gay/lesbian people. But I don't hold his Christianity against him, because when it comes to matters of government he refers to the Constitution, not his bible.
Don't let that "R" next to his name fool you, Jack. He has about as much in common with the current Republicans as the Queen of England. But this statement kinda surprised me, coming from you:
So appealing to the big-money, big-government cluster-farg that we've had for, well, ever, is an improvement because they have a "D" by their name?Maybe, just maybe, there are those out there that think that MORE government isn't the solution to the problem the HUGE government created. Paul's the ONLY candidate with a different view.
There's just not that much difference between Rudy and Hillary to even notice, and It's looking more and more that's gonna be the big race.
But what I really enjoy about your rants, Jack, is that you can rail against Paul at the same time you're taking his ad money on your side-bar. Ain't America grand???
"But what I really enjoy about your rants, Jack, is that you can rail against Paul at the same time you’re taking his ad money on your side-bar."
I respect Jack's right to rail against Ron Paul at the same time his blog receives ad money from Ron Paul supporters. I suspect that Ron Paul does too.
Indeed...America IS grand! While I don't support Paul, I figure pennies spent here at TPRS are pennies that aren't spent elsewhere where they might actually do some "good". Besides, I need the money. :O)
Hey a shout out to my friend Bob (who is actually a pretty decent tenor, by the way)
Ya know, Ron Paul has yet to call me to ask whether my black lab would be willing to be his running mate. I've been sitting by the phone for weeks now . Heck, I'm even a voting constituent in the 14th congressional district - you'd think I'd be able to get a little love from Ron. But the phone remains silent. With my dog - either one, the fat one or the tall one - by his side, Dr. Paul would have gotten at least twice the number of Electoral College votes in January 09. That number would still have been zero, of course.
In my view, Dr. Paul remains a member of the House of Representatives because of the strange political make-up of this district and the apparent complete lack of interest in politics by most voters here. The redneck "ranchers", for the lack of better term to describe most of the south part of the 14th district constituency, put him in office. Just think about the beautiful town of Santa Fe and the court case over having prayer at football games and there are his voters. He's the 14th district's fault and if I could apologize for all of them, I would.
I've said it before, but Ron Paul could have made a real difference in Washington. He could have stood up for the principles he says he believes in. He could have actually been mentioned in future history books had he done one thing - introduce a resolution of impeachment for George Walker. Bush and Richard Bruce Cheney (and how many of you knew what the B. stood for?)
I applaud and agree with Dr. Paul on the Iraq war, but he is 180 degrees apart from the rest of America on most of his other positions. I suspect we wouldn't much like the kind of America Ron Paul would have us living in.
And Dennis is quite the respectable bass! Picture this: An agnostic and an atheist in political discord, but harmonizing "Going to Bethlehem... Going to Bethlehem..."
A "Libertarian" who is anti-abortion and religious is not a Libertarian at all.
Somewhere, Ayn Rand is turning over in her grave.