You’ve seen it a lot: a conspiracy theory along the lines of, “Ron Paul’s more popular than the media lets on. His real influence is suppressed by the establishment. They’re afraid of him, because he is a threat.”
Interestingly, this theory is now touted not only by the congressman’s supporters—but by those whom you’d think would be his greatest enemies: the Left.
Jon Stewart—no far-right libertarian—has made a big deal about the media “ignoring” the Republican hopeful. The left-leaning commentator of our own website, of course, has spent the past two weeks on the same point. Such has even extended into the student newspaper of my university—a newspaper whose editorial page could hardly be accused of right-wing sympathies.
A brief comparison between Ron Paul and the policies of the Left should result in quite a few raised eyebrows. First: As late as the August 11 debate, he’s advocated lowering taxes for all—including the evil, greedy corporate executives demonized so vehemently by the Left. Considering all the cries that “the rich should pay their fair share,” this stance alone—along with the libertarian advocacy for massive repeal of regulation—should make Leftists shy away from Ron.
Second: A libertarian to the last, he’s for severely slashing the size and scope of government. News flash, Lefties: that includes Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. As far as Ron’s concerned, if it’s not directly mentioned in the Constitution—throw it out.
Third: He’s staunchly pro-life. I once had a conversation with a hard-core “pro-choice” young woman, about my age. She claimed that Ron’s the only Republican she’d choose over Obama. When I pointed out that he’s pro-life, she replied, “I don’t care if he’s pro-life—so long as he’s not anti-choice!” Sadly for the Left, euphemisms and double-speak don’t change facts. If abortion is such a major issue for you—you can’t have your cake and eat it, too.
These three major differences—and they are major—should at least compensate for where the Left and Ron agree: foreign policy, drugs, etc. So…why are they so eager to glorify him?
It is because of what everyone but his supporters will admit: Ron Paul cannot and will not receive the same support in the primaries that he received in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls—not by a long shot. For all the things he is right on—and I freely admit, there are many—his negatives are far too apparent. Even if he somehow became the Republican candidate—he could never defeat Obama, for those reasons.
(As for the media: they played up Jon Huntsman like mad—and his campaign is, frankly, a failure. One can’t blame lack of support on the media: the key is connecting with the people, not waiting for the press to “like” you. Sorry, folks—any “blackout” is irrelevant.)
When you see the Left glorifying a Republican—be it Ron Paul or John McCain—it is precisely because he is not a threat to the power they wield. It is because they don’t fear him. That’s all it is…and all it will be.
If you want an end to US meddling in the affairs of other nations, you vote Ron Paul. If not, you vote the rest. The left media hasn’t been glorifying Ron Paul, it’s just certain segments of the press. People like John Stewart who like, Juan Williams at Fox, are tired of the simplistic democrat-republican narrative.
On that, of course, I disagree. Observe how the media has instead focuses their attentions on smearing Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry. They have done nothing of that magnitude to Ron Paul.
As to your first point–as I have said, Ron Paul would be defeated by Obama handily. Voting for him would do nothing to change what you see as meddling. It’s a protest vote–and I’m all for that, but only if one’s aware that one’s throwing away said vote.
Rick Perry has also condemned meddling in other nation’s affairs–but unlike Ron Paul, he understands the need to go overseas for purposes of national defense. That, and he is capable of beating Obama.
Please note: I am not condemning Ron Paul–at all. As I’ve said, I agree with him on a lot. I am simply saying that the “certain segmants of the press” you refer to are trying to snooker you all into a false sense of security. Don’t let them do that. The Left is NOT your friend.
I would only have to guess that I’m the “left-leaning” commentator you mentioned. Make no mistake- I’m no Democrat, and I’m no Republican. The two party system this country’s adopted has done nothing but harm any progress we could hope of making. If I had to classify myself, I’d say I’m a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.
As far as Dr. Paul’s policies go…
On lower taxes for all — he actually doesn’t like the income tax at all. That’s fine by me. Let the states come up with a spending tax and whatever else they want to do. Don’t touch my hard earned income. If the states want to do that, fine, but screw the Feds doing that crap.
As for limiting the size of the federal government, go for it! How many departments of whatever does the government have? Too many to count and many of them are quite useless. If we can have decent enough regulations on insurance companies, doing away with Medicare and all that wouldn’t be a problem.
He’s staunchly pro-life, yes, because of his many years as a deliverer of babies. However, Ron understands that this isn’t an issue for the federal government. If it’s gotta be a state issue, fine.
Just because I may disagree with the man on some of his views — he’s a creationist, after all — that doesnt mean I can’t support him. I support him because he’s one of the only politicians since JFK to be /real/ with us. He doesn’t pander and he doesn’t mince words.
Ron Paul stands for individual liberty and restoring America to the great country it once was. Warrantless wiretaps? Gone. Excessive government spending? Gone. Interventionist forgeign policy that makes other countries resent us? Gone. Ridiculous monetary policy, allowing the Federal Reserve to print money as they see fit? Gone.
Troops abroad? Returned, out of harm’s way and doing what they were meant to do — be there in case they need to /defend/ our country. Habeus corpus? Returned. No more indefinite detention and no more torture.
Does be stand a chance against Obama? Absolutely. Many of the people who voted for Obama (like myself) are sick of him not living up to expectations. Either he was a bald-faced liar during his campaign, or someone else (i.e. the banks and corporations) are pulling the strings. If Ron Paul were to get into office and suddenly do a 180, you’d know something was up. This is a man who has been disciplined and principled the whole of his 30+ years in government.
Is the media poking fun at Bachmann and Perry? Yep, but they’re getting coverage. Those clowns are getting coverage over a person who speaks the truth and brings intelligent debate to the table. That’s a problem.
But then again, if he got into office, he’d probably wind up just like John Kennedy because he would refuse to play ball with the special interests and the military industrial/homeland security complex.
Just my .02.
“On lower taxes for all — he actually doesn’t like the income tax at all. That’s fine by me. Let the states come up with a spending tax and whatever else they want to do. Don’t touch my hard earned income. If the states want to do that, fine, but screw the Feds doing that crap.”
That is most interesting. You didn’t seem to have that point of view a few weeks ago, when you wrote about the S&P downgrade, and expressed vehement agreement with the recommendation to, in your words, “Soak The Rich”. Pardon me for my “misconception”…I was under the impression that that was an indication of economic Leftism.
As for Barack Obama “lying”–he hasn’t. Those paying attention during the primaries for ’08, as I had, remember his advocating universal health care, his advocacy of higher taxes for the rich, and so on. He later toned himself down afterwords. We on the Right saw it coming, because we actually listened to his words when he was “safe”.
By the way…JFK, you may recall, pursued supply-side Reaganomics long before it was called that. He advocated tax cuts for the wealty to creat jobs–a policy which, again, you have referred to in a most disparaging manner.
Finally…JFK was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald–a communist sympathizer who saw Jack as the embodiment of everything he hated–no one else. There was no conspiracy over his death, any more than there was one over Obama’s birth cirtificate–or, in fact, 9/11.
My $0.02, good sir.
A couple other things:
“He’s staunchly pro-life, yes, because of his many years as a deliverer of babies. However, Ron understands that this isn’t an issue for the federal government. If it’s gotta be a state issue, fine.”
I’m sorry…but if you’re pro-life, you must by definition believe that abortion is murder. Not even the most radical libertarian would advocate legalization of what they hold to be murder, let alone make it a “state issue”.
Also…”decent regulation of insurance companies”? Ron is for de-regulation, and allowing the free-market system to work. On this, he and I agree.
[...] is no longer the worst Conan to ever appear on the big screen. Ron Paul – The mainstream media has gone gaga over Ron Paul in recent weeks with a favor that haven’t shown any Republican since John McCain‘s [...]