Ron Who?

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism. - Ron Paul

There is little doubt that Ron Paul has a fanatic base of supporters. Their idolatry approaches cultism. Now he is being hailed as a leader near the top of the pack in popularity for the Republican presidential nomination.

I recently saw this op ed about the Ron Paul candidacy in The Washington Times, one of the rightist of the right wing newspapers.

“Many of Mr. Paul’s defenders insist he is a champion - a lone voice, even - of the “true” Constitution and the “real” principles of the conservative movement. Moreover, they are determined to tell you that, often in emails typed in all capitals.”

Ron Paul claims to be a Constitutionalist, but pretty much goes stomping through the Constitution like Godzilla does Tokyo. This isn’t unusual for those not schooled in Constitutional Law.

“Now he insists that everyone in Washington will suddenly do what he wants once he's in the White House. That's almost painfully naive. And it's ironic that the only way the libertarian-pure-constitutionalist in the race could do the things he's promising would be by using powers not in the Constitution.”

His justifications for fiscal conservatism claim to have predicted our economic mess.

“Or maybe it wasn’t prescience. Maybe it was paranoia. After all, if you worry about enough things, some of your warnings are going to turn out to be accurate. When a hypochondriac finally is diagnosed with a disease after years of pointless worrying, it kind of takes the bite out of his “I told you so.””

Ron Paul’s past has been brought up as of late regarding his revolutionary supporters. Although he has disavowed the incendiary principles they have espoused, he still welcomes their authors. That, in itself, shouldn’t cause censure. Although there is just a quick allusion to it in the article, the disturbing issue seems to be that Paul has lost control of his message.

“This is the point in the standard anti-Ron Paul column where I am supposed to denounce his many bad associations, his racist newsletters - which he didn’t write, though he let them go out with his name on them for years - his batty national security ideas and his potted history of American foreign policy. Should Mr. Paul go on to be a serious contender for the Republican nomination, I reserve my right to revisit all of that because - contrary to the claims of many of his supporters - Mr. Paul’s background hasn’t been scrutinized nearly enough.”

Although Ron Paul has a pretty rabid support base, he seems to have little penetration in the mainstream media, mainstream America and the Republican leadership. It seems that his most dedicated followers have been able to get him into the lead in some caucuses and straw polls, but that is far from an indicator of his general electability. His legislative record and realm of political influence reflect that.

“Mr. Paul has been in Congress, off and on, for nearly 30 years. In that time, he will rightly tell you, Congress has spent money with reckless abandon, expanded the state's police powers, launched numerous wars without a declaration of war and further embraced fiat money. (He got into politics when Richard Nixon took us fully off the gold standard.) During all of that, he took to the floor and delivered passionate speeches in protest, convincing nobody. He authored precious little legislation of any consequence.

Mr. Paul's supporters love to talk about how he was a lone voice of dissent. They never explain why he was alone in his dissent. Why couldn't he persuade even his ideologically sympathetic colleagues? Why is there no Ron Paul caucus?”

Despite claims to the contrary, libertarianism, Reagan conservatism, neo-conservatism and the Tea Party have become factions of the Republican Party. That is where they get their power; that is where they get their influence and ultimately where they get their funding. Despite the fervor, Ron Paul appears to be nothing more than yet another flavor of the week.

Comments

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

The argument that there's never been a true capitalism is nothing but the argument that there's never been a true Communism in a different fashion. And if Paul should win Iowa, so what? It's a meaningless barometer of who actually wins the nomination, let alone the general.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

A statement that Paul made a while ago was that he was retiring from Congress so that he could sink all his time and resources into a presidential run. While I consider caucuses pretty much immaterial to general elections, doing well in a caucus may encourage him to do an independent presidential run.

That could be significant if he does that. He already has indicated that he has little regard for the traditional Republican leadership and is already running against the Libertarian Party. He stands to be able to stir up the general election in that sense.

[evil-genius.livejournal.com]

Which would split the republican vote, and help ensure Obama's second term. If I believed in a God. I would pray for this scenario.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

After all, if you worry about enough things, some of your warnings are going to turn out to be accurate.

That's the easiest way to dismiss the warnings - "he's just some crazy wacko who worries about everything; a broken clock is right twice a day", etc. Maybe Niall Ferguson was also a paranoic who worried about too many things? Well except he wasn't. He built an argument that now turns out to have been true.

Ron Paul might be crazy about many other things, but the faults in the financial/economic structure that are bound to lead to a crisis/collapse ain't one of them. He's not telling us anything new by the way. Everybody knows that the system in its current form is unsustainable in the long run, but he is the crazy guy.

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

He's crazy NOT for identifying the problem, but for some of his solutions

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

After all, if you worry about enough things, some of your warnings are going to turn out to be accurate.

This, specifically, is what I'm addressing.

[yahvah.livejournal.com]

Your criticism lacks a significant amount of meat. What I mean to say is this is a lot of baseless assertions. Tell me what makes Ron Paul not a true Republican standing amongst a bunch of neo-cons who probably couldn't tell you who started the Democratic-Republican party. If you can convince me with objectivity, I can be convinced.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

As stated in the OP and the linked article under legislative record, he has no legislative influence.

[yahvah.livejournal.com]

He has no legislative influence is a reason he's like Godzilla in Tokyo when interpreting the constitution? That's totally irrelevant unless you're saying he lacks influence because of his opinion of constitutional interpretation. In fact, in the House, it's more like again, he's mostly alone in being an actual Republican. The notion that in this modern day and age, Ron Paul is really a libertarian, only demonstrates how as time progresses, the people accept ignorance more. What is this bandwagon I see wanting to come into explicit existence?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Which is a true point, but not a relevant one to the question posed.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

He wants the USA out of wars instead of pissing away money in the Middle East to prop up a state that doesn't really need the help, that's what. A real Republican wants the USA to spend US money and US lives on wars overseas, at least to judge by the outrage of fiscal and social conservatives to Herr Doktor Stormfront.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

The things you are stating are quotes directly from the article. That is the opinion of the author of the original article in the Washington Times. I think the "Who Cares" opinion is accurate, especially to the people that have no intention of voting for him. This is what made me come to the conclusion from the last line of the OP.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Ron Paul claims to be a Constitutionalist, but pretty much goes stomping through the Constitution like Godzilla does Tokyo. This isn’t unusual for those not schooled in Constitutional Law.

“Now he insists that everyone in Washington will suddenly do what he wants once he's in the White House. That's almost painfully naive. And it's ironic that the only way the libertarian-pure-constitutionalist in the race could do the things he's promising would be by using powers not in the Constitution.”

Such as?

I have a lot of problems with Ron Paul. But, so far, every criticism of him I see, from people ardently opposed to him, seems to be such a reach.

His justifications for fiscal conservatism claim to have predicted our economic mess.

“Or maybe it wasn’t prescience. Maybe it was paranoia. After all, if you worry about enough things, some of your warnings are going to turn out to be accurate. When a hypochondriac finally is diagnosed with a disease after years of pointless worrying, it kind of takes the bite out of his “I told you so.””

Kind of like environmentalists and climate change, right? A lot of the warnings he expressed was just as predictory and open-ended as theirs. Saying we can't run this economy the way we've been running it forever is a true statement regardless of how long it takes for it to become obvious.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Kind of like environmentalists and climate change, right?

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I have a lot of problems with Ron Paul

Not you've made me curious. Please proceed.

(frozen) (no subject)

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

It was dealt with, and prior to this comment. You know where to go for this sort of complaint.

(frozen) (no subject)

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

He can't, and he won't. And for someone who claims she doesn't want drama, you sure are using the wrong place (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/237010.html).

[oportet.livejournal.com]

People who say Ron Paul would make a good president are like people who say aliens exist, or Waffle House taste good - I agree with them, but they still sound fucking crazy.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

I want a frozen thread!

I can't think of anything particularly offensive to say but I'm feeling left out.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

I am signless and a picture of all those signs is offensive to me. You're being sign-ist!