Mostly Cloudy ~
High: 84°F ~ Low: 67°F
Thursday, July 28, 2016
Defending Ron PaulPosted Thursday, January 12, 2012, at 8:01 AM
Having watched the most recent rounds of never-ending Republican debates, I have concluded that I can be comfortable with any of the current crop of Republican candidates in the White House.
My guy, Herman Cain, is out.
The only good thing about that is that by the time the primaries get to Indiana, my vote will probably be meaningless.
I am a conservative with Libertarian tendencies. I am not a Libertarian. That said, Congressman Dr. Ron Paul is getting a bum rap and someone who is not a brainwashed Ran Paul fanatic aught to stand up and say something.
That would be me.
In the debates, it is now routine for the liberal moderators to ask Ron Paul a yes or no question about Libertarian principals, which would require a lot of explanation for people not familiar with the political philosophy.
In the debate format, this is very difficult for Dr. Paul to do.
Libertarians believe Thomas Jefferson's principal that "the government which governs least, governs best."
They believe that government should not legislate morality.
People should be permitted to make their own choices, but must also reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of those choices. This is particularly true regarding the federal government, which is severely limited by the U.S. Constitution, unlike the states, which have substantially more regulatory power under the Constitution.
Libertarians oppose all social welfare programs: Food stamps, Medicaid, Social Security, and all the rest.
"So Dr. Paul, should we allow the sick, aged, and poor to die on the streets?"
The premise of the question assumes that only the government can help.
In America, the modern welfare state started in the late 1960s. Before that, limited poor relief started in the 1930s.
Were there corpses in the streets before that? No.
Churches and community organizations satisfied the need and did a better job of saving people than the government does now.
Libertarians oppose all corporate welfare, bailouts, preferences and any other business preference you can think of other than an economically rational tax policy.
"So Dr. Paul, should we allow everyone affiliated with GM and Chrysler become unemployed?"
This question assumes that by allowing these companies to go bankrupt, they would go out of business.
Like airline companies which go bankrupt every 10 years or so, they most certainly would not. Moreover, the question assumes that there is no such thing as evolution in the business world.
Every company listed in the Dow Jones in 1930 is gone except General Electric.
Many became extinct; others are now de-listed because they are dying. When an owl eats a mouse, which is not adapted to survive in its environment, we say that is evolution even though the mouse is not particularly happy about it.
Why is it different when a business fails to adapt to the market environment?
"So Dr. Paul, you believe in segregation. You are a racist!"
Libertarians are no more and no less racists than anyone else. Libertarians believe that the right to peaceably assemble includes the right to not assemble with people you don't want to assemble with.
Libertarians also believe that all men are created equal. Businesses that exclude people, or discriminate, for irrational reasons, deserve to fail. It does not mean that the business should be interfered with by the government.
Libertarians believe you should not legislate morality. Conservatives believe that all legislation is a reflection of morality. Therefore, conservatives believe it is legitimate to legislate morality. However, both conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) and Libertarians believe that if the federal government would simply stay within the bounds of the Constitution, we would all be more free and free to make our own independent decisions regarding moral issues.
The saying goes that the best you are ever going to get with a political candidate is about 70 percent agreement. It is a shame that virtually all 30 percent of my disagreement with Ron Paul is in foreign policy.
Libertarians are not necessarily isolationists, but Dr. Paul strongly advocates that American power stay primarily within its shores. He believes that if the United States left other nations alone, they would be more likely to leave us alone. Ironically, this is basically the same point of view Barack Obama had before he became president.
Personally, I believe you have to accept the world the way you find it and deal with it accordingly. With the Iranians building missile bases in Venezuela, I am reminded of Cuba circa 1962.
Khruschev may not be declaring that he will bury us, but Ahamadinejad has said as much.
To me, it doesn't matter why Iran is putting missiles in Venezuela.
The president has to deal with it.
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]
Respond to this blog
Posting a comment requires free registration: