Why I Am Not A Ron Paul Supporter.

December 26, 2007

It’s the Christmas doldrums and things have been gotten a bit dull round here. Too dull. Let’s change that, shall we – let’s talk about Ron Paul. Nothing will light up the hit counter or set off fireworks in the comments section faster than an opinion about our favorite Libertarian in elephant’s clothing.
[ad#Google Adsense]
I know some of the writers and commenters here at louisianaconservative.com, including Avman himself, are supporting Ron Paul for President this upcoming election. I am not one of them. A quick perusal of his website shows many of his positions I can support – on taxation, education, Social Security, health care, energy, the environment, and Second Amendment rights, etc. On some things he is a darn sight more Republican than a few others in the GOP race (cough – Rudy – cough). But all of that can not make up for what is, for me, the deal breaker – the one issue where we disagree: The Terror War. Ron Paul does not want to fight it; and I believe that if we do not WIN it all of the other things Ron Paul advocates that I may support, are irrelevant.

That is why I am not a Ron Paul supporter.

Like many on the Left and the Far Right, Ron Paul seems to think if we stop fighting and go home, we won’t be bothered by our adversaries anymore. Unlike the last century, oceans will not keep America’s enemies at bay anymore. Paul and the other isolationists Left and Right talk as if this whole thing was all our fault (and Israel’s, too) – that Islamic fundamentalism didn’t exist before the 2000 election and that our adversaries are just nice people forced to defend their land from a crazed American military, a bumbling George Bush, and his greedy corporate overlords. When Ron Paul talks about The Terror War and sounds like the Democratic Underground, or Daily Kos commentors, or 9/11 conspiracy-theory advocates, I’m looking elsewhere for Presidential leadership.

That is why I am not a Ron Paul supporter.

I believe what we should be supporting is a candidate who is focused on winning The Terror War like our grandparents were focused on winning the Second World War. The stakes are just as high. On September 11, 2001, our adversaries declared War on us by causing the deaths of thousands of our countrymen. Actually, they had declared war on us years before, but we ignored them and stayed home (the same policy Ron Paul now proposes). Simply because Congress didn’t declare war back then didn’t protect us – our adversaries brought the war here. Why they did this is simple: their God told them to. You see, our enemy isn’t mad at us. He hates us. He hates us because he believes his God hates us. We are “infidels”. We are not even human in his eyes unless we embrace his God and live our lives the way our enemy decrees. Our enemy wants to see our country – it’s people, it’s laws, it’s freedoms, and it’s way of life – crushed and destroyed to please his God. Not humiliated, not forced to change some point of foreign policy. Destroyed. Wiped from the face of the Earth. Our enemy wants to see each of us either under his spell, under his thumb, or under the ground. Our enemy wants to see my daughter illiterate, subservient, and wrapped in a sack just to go outside. Our enemy says that a return to the 12th century is humanity’s only option; and we, simply by prospering here in freedom in the 21st century, disprove his thesis. He hates that. Therefore, this conflict can never be resolved by simply refusing to fight, or by talking at a negotiating table, or through “mutual respect” or “understanding”. It can only be resolved one way: IT MUST BE WON. OUR ENEMY MUST BE DEFEATED. Discussions about any other issue are of little importance until we make sure that our country will continue to exist – free from the threat from religious jihadists – as a secure place where such discussions can take place. Ron Paul does not seem to understand this set of priorities.

That is why I am not a Ron Paul supporter.

And finally, dear readers, let’s be frank: Ron Paul is not a Republican. Ron Paul is a Libertarian. While my ideals are decidedly little “l” libertarian, I am not a Libertarian. I never have been, and don’t think I ever will be. While libertarian ideals carry incredible weight on the American political landscape, and with me, the Libertarian Party does not. (An earlier LP critique is here.) The reason can be summed up by an old military axiom: “the perfect is the enemy of the good”. Libertarians strive to be so ideologically pure in responding to issues they seem to forget that, in order to change things in a representative democracy you have to appeal to a majority of the voters and win elections. Really. You do. Not a seat on the Real Estate Commission here, or a Deputy County Secretary for Animal Control there, but elections to offices that affect people. Lots of people. Mayors. Governors. Legislators. Senators. Presidents. And you will never do that when you see everything through the ideological prism of long-winded treatises, mid-century novels, and an online test. Look, nobody likes force or fraud; that’s a no-brainer. So is the idea that individualism and a free market will always kick the butt of collectivism and a planned economy. But what people want to know from an elected official is how you will fix their dangerous intersection, or how you will deal with the crazy neighbor with the 30 cars in his yard, or how you will deal with the fundamentalists who want to kill their kids on an airplane. (And sometimes, force is necessary to accomplish that. Offensive force. We do not live in a world of absolutes.) The Libertarian Party has to appeal to more than free druggers, cranky bohemians, computer geeks, and Ayn Rand fans. There are not enough of them to elect someone President; there are not enough of them to elect Ron Paul.

That is why I am not a Ron Paul supporter.

RP devotees and LP faithful: Go to the comment window, and you may begin tarring and feathering at will. But remember: I give as good as I get. Better, actually, as I’m on holiday all Christmas break with nothing better to do….


7 comments
topjimmy_3
topjimmy_3

For you out there still in the stone age. We do not need to be on the ground in any middle eastern country to destory them. We have the capacity to destroy our enemies from right here. Quit using that excuse. And quit being hipocrites about prolife, if your prolife you have to be antiwar, because war kills people, duh.

ckonopasek
ckonopasek

I just want to comment that freonfreakone and timbud stated and supported their view points with expertise. If I had wanted to post a comment it would have duplicated exactly what they said. You both responded to clifford's comments specifically and with excellent examples. Thank you.

timbud
timbud

Why you should not fear terrorism and vote for Ron Paul... Once you understand that muslim extremists don't attack us becuase we are free, prosperous, and because we let our women run around in bikinis, then it's easier to understand why it is so vital we get the hell out of the middle east as fast as possible. CIA documents, which I honestly havent seen myself but Dr. Paul has made reference to on several occasions, plus the 9/11 comission report, which I have read (well kind of perused) tells us that we were attacked on 9/11 because of bases built on percieved holy lands in Saudi Arabia, hence 15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi's. The extremists are also upset because we were bombing Iraq in the last persian gulf war and we've been tampering with the Iranian government since 1953 and that has led to blowback that affects Iranian attitudes toward the US to this day. As Americans we all need to take a history lesson in US forgein policy in the middle east, then you can better understand why they dislike us, but more importantly why we not need fear future terror attacks whether they are bound to happen or not. If the terrorists really want to get us, they'll hit us whether we have troops over there or not, but I'm willing to bet after the butt kicking we've been dishing out over there for the last seven years, I doubt they'll be in a hurry to invite us back anytime soon. Logic dictates that our military can protect us a lot easier here in America than half way across the world. If that doesn't sway you, then remember this, you can't win the war on terror because terror is not a country, it's a tactic. Iraq never attacked us, we are the aggressors in this war and now our boys are losing their lives so the politicians that made the mistake of invading under false pretenses can save face and install the goverment of their choice. We're not helping our boys and we're not helping this country by spending trillions of dollars on a preemptive war we can not afford to fight anymore. Oh yeah and if you're worried about Isreal, don't forget we send 3 times more finacial aid to Arab nations than Isreal. Remember right after 911 when people were saying, when you let the terrorists depict the decisions you make, they win. Why is that any different now? God Bless this Beautiful Country and all the people in it, no matter who you're planning on voting for. Hope this helps change your opinion on Dr. Paul.

freonfreakone
freonfreakone

Cliff, I'm just gonna tell you why I do support Ron Paul on the points on which you do not. Please, forgive me if I ramble and revisit the same points, or misspell a word or thirty, or use a word or phrase out of context or just completely wrong. I'm just trying to get my point across as best I can, and am not meaning to be 'haughty', 'snooty', 'snide' or self-important. If I do become critical, it's not meant to be a personal attack, but a comment on people in general. I view myself as an 'average' American who's grown tired of the insulting lies and half-truths our government officials have visited upon us. The War On Terror. It doesn't make sense to me to send money to people who send that money on to other people who then use that money to purchase arms and materials used to assassinate our fighting men and women. The Saudi Royal Family, to use just one egregious example, is notorious for this. Political Intervention. If we had stayed out of World War I, would things have been far different in the years spanning 1918 to 1937? Since Hitlers rise to power in 1933 was a direct result of the treatment of Germany after WWI, would WWII even have happened, had we not participated in I? A Necessary War... Once Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, a global war was inevitable. We had not choice in the matter; Hitler's Germany had to be stopped by any means necessary, and Japan's attack on Pearl was just a good excuse at the right time. That is the one example I can think of since the War of 1812 where our war-footing was 'necessary' to prevent an attack on our borders. Even the American Civil War was a b/s war...but I digress. Why The Growth Of Islamic Fundamentalism? Islamic fundamentalism is only a problem because of the behavior of our own corporate and individual mechanations. The Moslem's don't start out hating America per se; they see our 'loose' lifestyle and behavior IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES as a threat. If our industrial-economic machine weren't meddling in Moslem lives by introducing sexual and individual freedoms to a culture that is barely deserving of the name, why would they have any reason to target us as an encroaching enemy? What Starts A 'War'? Hypothetically, if you come into my home, and start making advances to my wife because my brother said it was okay to do so, I'd damn sure punch you in the nose, I don't care how 'purely' you may live your life otherwise. As a result, if you bring in your big bully friend to rough me up, or convince the afore-mentioned brother to do likewise, promising them certain advantages while at YOUR house, then we go to war, jack. I'll doing drive-by's, maybe even bombing your home. Who started it? You did, by violating MY code of behavior while at MY home. Are my over-zealous methods moral? Maybe not, but I'll bet you pay rapt attention to them. Of course, the whole thing could have been avoided by either not coming to my house, or not violating my code of behavior while there... A Real Response To Extremism... If it's true that Islamic extremism is so rampant that a 'war' is needed, then why not wage one? A real one, not this pussy-footing b/s that's been going for 7 years now. America is the strongest military power on the face of the Earth. We have a nuclear arsenal that is second to none. Since the terrorists that took down the Twin Towers were predominantly from Saudi Arabia, a little threat along the lines of "Find the people who did this, or lose a city a week until it's done" would carry great impact. Sure worked for Japan... WOW! Am I Unqualifiedly NUTS!?... No, Cliff, I'm not ADVOCATING nuclear intervention. I'm pointing up the hypocracy of an American Military-Industrial complex (GWB included) that claims we're in a global 'war' against a sect of people who's entire mission in life is the elimination of America, Americans, and our way of life, thru genocide if need be. You don't respond to that type of aggression with half measures. You use whatever power is at your command to overwhelmingly STOMP it out, IF it really exists. THAT is war, my friend. A Dose Of Reality... If we withdraw from the middle east, and pull our financial support from the region, the 'problem' for these terrorists is gone. Further, if our current governnment had the peas to call for the 'sacrifices' GWB SAID we'd HAVE to make as a result of 9/11, we'd be getting massive tax breaks specifically targeted to funding conversions to alternative fuels like hydrogen, solar, wind, and whatnot; we could let the region fall back into the stone age where it belongs, instead of propping it up with our trillions of tax dollars like we do now. We're creating our own problems in an attempt to 'globalise' democracy, and make trillions of dollars for Wall Street. Hey, if the sand trotters don't want democracy, better to leave them to their own devices, however primitive they may be. Ron Paul: Republican Or Libertarian? Finally, the only reason Ron Paul has been able to remain in office as a congressman IS because he runs on the Republican ticket, thanks to the overwhelmingly blind view by most voting Americans that there are ONLY 2 parties in this country: Donkey and Elephant, Democrat and Republican. I too was once of this mindset, but no more. After 10 years or so, I grew tired of voting 'for the lesser of two evils'. Also, the two major parties are where the funding for a Presidential race is at. The Libertarian Party, much as I may admire their ideals, is a fiscal pauper. If the very libertarian Dr. Paul is to have ANY chance at the White House, he needs the economic backing of the money machine that is the RNC. Hypocracy? Perhaps, but that's the System as We've made it. Me, I haven't voted for a Democrat for over a decade, and only for a Republican if an alternative weren't available. But I can GUARANTEE you that I'll vote for this one. Democrats Vs. Republicans: What's The Difference? Whether it's Democrats or Republicans other than Ron Paul that win the White House, big whoop. Nothing substantial will change. I'll still be paying half of my meager paycheck in taxes. Social Security will still be a fiscal Rabbit In The Hat. Socialized Health Care will still be an issue. Gun rights will still be debated. Funding for the conversion to alternative fuels will still be largely a fantasy. Worst of all, our young soldiers, men and women who BELIEVE in our Constitution and Flag, will still be killed and maimed in foreign lands for people who neither appreciate it, nor deserve the sacrifice (that INCLUDES the vast majority of our own current government officials). Ron Paul says he will try his best to change all that, and I believe him over all the other Republican 'normals' in the race. I'll give him one shot. If he reneges, I give up on the Republican Party as I have given up on the Democrats. I'll vote, but unless there's an alternative to the two, I'll be either just pushing a 'Vote' button, or handing in a blank ballot with my name at the bottom. Either way, my dissatisfaction with the neocon and socialist government officials will be documented. Okay, you can rip me a new one now. Regards, Mike Roussel

clifford
clifford

Well, well, well. Five days, and no Ron-driod has weighed in to take on your humble writer. Not one refutation, or even one obscenity-laced invective. I'm hurt. So c'mon guys; see if you can hit me. Let's see if he really is The One.

Greta Perry
Greta Perry

Bravo!!!! My name is Greta and I am conservative and I do not support Ron Paul's leave and shut the door behind you war strategy!

<ADMINNICENAME>
<ADMINNICENAME>

Heh, I was going to write a pro RP piece today, but I'll hold off til tomorrow... hehehe

Please help Louisiana Conservative Dot Com. Please donate $5, $10, or whatever you can afford to help our cause today!

Like Box