Columns

The Irresistibility of Ron Paul

By: Nancy Smith | Posted: May 31, 2012 3:55 AM
I Beg to Differ
It's easy to see why Ron Paul scores a fan base the envy of sports franchises and rock stars.

He's got the answers a scared-out-of-its-wits America is looking for. Come to that, he's got the answers I'm looking for.

It isn't his anti-government, pro-liberty message that resonates so well with me -- though there's nothing wrong with that. It's his plan. He's actually got one. How's that for novel?

Right off, anyone who can show me he knows how to balance the federal budget and begin to pay down the national debt has my respect and my attention and if he makes it to the ballot, probably my vote.

Paul's "Plan to Restore America" would "lose" $1 trillion from the federal budget within a year and eliminate five Cabinet-level departments. It would even slash the president's $400,000-a-year salary to $39,336 -- a move particularly near and dear to his heart because the revised figure is equal to the median personal income of the American worker.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul | Credit: Evan Meyer - Shutterstock

Balance the federal budget? Libertarian Ron Paul promises -- hand-on-the-Bible promises -- that he can do it by the third year of his presidency. And I believe he knows how.

Major regulatory relief, large spending cuts and a sound monetary policy? Check out Paul's economic plan. His fix is as easy as painting by numbers.

But there is a bump on his roadmap to fiscal redemption. Admittedly, that bump is less bump-like than it is something akin to the Matterhorn. It's the ax he takes to Pentagon funding for wars. And foreign aid. He actually zeroes out foreign aid.

But, even with a national defense budget that looks more at home on a box of Fruit Loops than anywhere near the Oval Office, Ron Paul is a candidate of impeccable integrity. What he says today he said five decades ago. He never ducks a question, never retreats from a principle when defending it becomes problematic. And there is no better student of American government.                                                                                                                                          
So, how come this Texas congressman, this next-to-last man standing in the 2012 Republican presidential primary -- wildly popular among his strong and close core supporters -- hasn't won a single state? How come he didn’t carry even one of Texas’ 36 congressional districts in Tuesday’s primary? Didn’t even come close.

I've heard a lot of reasons given:

Ron Paul is too fringe to be electable, he isn't spending enough money, refuses to run attack ads, his foreign policy is too docile, he is too old to run the country (at 76 years old) and, most recently, he is fracturing the Republican Party infrastructure.

The answer is "some of the above." But more than any of them, it is the sheer irresistibility and purity and right-mindedness of his economic plan.

It's a plan, after a little tinkering in the area of defense spending, that could work.

That makes it radical, and scary. Think about it:

  • Paul's "Restore America" plan would cut spending by the Environmental Protection Agency by 30 percent, whack 40 percent from the Food and Drug Administration's budget and immediately freeze spending by numerous agencies at 2006 levels -- the last time Republicans had complete control of the budget.
  • The plan would reduce the federal work force by 10 percent.
  • Medicaid, food stamps, family support programs and the children's nutrition program would be block-granted to the states.
Remember, I said it could work, not would work.

Try to imagine for a minute how many apple carts cuts like these would upset.

Think of the jobs lost, think of the impact to society should the federal government cease to be the massive gravy train it is today.

Think of the push-backs required from vested interests of every description.

And you think the crescendo of partisan bickering now couldn't get any more dissonant?

No. Ron Paul's candidacy, most likely the last presidential candidacy of his life, is built on an impossible dream.

When all is said and done, we can't elect a plan that would work. It would be an exercise in futility. It would be shredded to bits. It would be totally, utterly unrealistic.

Sadly perhaps, our government has evolved.



Reach Nancy Smith at nsmith@sunshinestatenews.com or at (850) 727-0859.




 


Comments (7)

Robert Lloyd
8:32AM JUN 3RD 2012
>>So, how come this Texas congressman, hasn't won a single state?<<

Could it be because of a Jewish controlled liberal media?

Of course not. That is antisemitism and an accusation of unfounded liberal bias. How dare me.
Frank
9:47AM MAY 31ST 2012
NANCY - You just seem to despise any governmental worker, even the President of the United States (or of the University of Florida), from making more than your retirement pay.

You appear to desire government and universities run only by the rich who can afford to do it for free (much like our current disaster, Governor Scott). Such simplistic ideas soon demonstrate their stupidity once they hit the wall of reality, much like many of Ron Paul's ideas once you get beyond the catchy sound bites.
fuzzywzhe
9:03PM MAY 31ST 2012
Frank, I got no idea how you draw those conclusions from that article.

But even though I'm not Nancy, who doesn't hate government workers? Doing jobs I don't want done, making me pay for it. If they are so valuable to society, I'm sure they could get a job in the private sector - except they aren't valuable. They are glorified welfare recipients, and I'm tired of being force to pay for them.
Robert Lloyd
8:37AM JUN 3RD 2012
Excellent post fuzzywzhe!!!! You know you hit a truthful nerve when 'Frank the big government man' has a problem with you.
Frank
10:06AM JUN 2ND 2012
You obviously haven't been reading Nancy's other articles attacking University President salaries, etc.

Go click on her name and check out previous articles going back some months.

Of course, if you don't want to pay for government workers, you can always just do without the water, sewer, roads, schools, garbage removal, police, armed forces, fire protection and the like that government workers provide if that's your vision of how you want to live. As that won't happen here, go live somewhere you won't have to pay - - they call it Somalia.
Freecommonsense
6:23AM MAY 31ST 2012
That is right Ron Paul has been speaking out against the wars since 1983, actually way earlier since he defended Israel in their right as a sovereign nation to their bombing of Iraqs nuclear reactors in 1981. There is also video evidence of him predicting the economic collapse five years, and even a decade before it happened. Wake up!

Research your candidate don't make the mistake I did, voted for an illusory obama "change"(sorry!), hearing the same Bush trash bs all over again, "he needs more time" bs and a Wall Street president is what happened, still happening.
andrewnappi
5:24AM MAY 31ST 2012
The Paul campaign has shown the shallowness of the GOP and the RPOF in particular. It also reveals that the vast majority of "tea party" people, whatever that even means at this point, along with that RPOF don't really want constitutionally limited government, or a constitutionally based foreign and economic policy. What they want is the continued tyranny of the perpetual welfare/warfare state, but with their tyrant in charge instead of the other guy's tyrant.

Leave a Comment on This Story

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.