One conservative's journey to discovering Ron Paul by Nolarond
(libertarian)
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
I am 34 years old. I am a conservative and an active follower of Christ. I have voted in every election since 1992 both primary and general. While I have never been a member of the Republican party, I have voted for a Republican in almost every single election because I have always believed that the Republican party was the "Conservative" party and I wanted to pick the conservative candidates.
I am very concerned about what is going on in the Republican party this year. I have always believed that *most* Republicans were more or less able to think for themselves, and did not allow themselves to be spoon-fed who to vote for by the media (the Main Stream Media OR Talk Radio). I guess this election has been a wake-up call for me.
A common theme I noticed early in this election year in conservative discussion forums was the lack of a true "Reagan Conservative", and how that saddened people. But then rumors started flying about Thompson possibly throwing his hat in the ring. When he did I was excited, and began thinking- "oh he WILL be the next president."
But then an odd thing happened. All of the talk about him turned into how he was un-enthused about the campaign, and that he didn't show up for debates, and that he wasn't very popular.
I didn't understand. How could this guy NOT be popular? I was disappointed by this, but was going to back him anyway.
But during my visits to the aforementioned forums, I would notice the name of Ron Paul keep coming up. What caught my attention was that when posters brought him up (in a positive way), the posters were completely dismissed. Not with serious dismissals such as "he isn't strong on tax reform", or "he's pro-choice", or "he's not strong on immigration." No, these posters were dismissed in a manner I would expect on a Democratic message board- by use of emotion and bullying, with non-answers and NO discussion of why Paul shouldn't be a serious choice for the GOP.
This piqued my curiosity so I decided to go check out his stance on the issues.
I found out that he is anti-gun control, pro-life, anti-IRS, pro-limited government. These are common conservative stances that I share. He seems OK to me so far.
Then threre are some issues the other candidates don't even take a stance on (that are VERY important to me): Paul is pro-home schooling and pro-freedom of healthcare. OK, so now he already overwhelmingly has my favor.
Now for that OTHER issue- Paul is against the war in Iraq.
Well, I started thinking about that whole situation and where I stood on it. Six months ago, I would have been the first to stand up and say- "we need to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes." But now I started to think about why I held that position. I think mostly I supported the war in Iraq because I thought "if the government has information that says this is the best course of action, then I will support it." But I was ignorant of the proper course of how the US is supposed to declare war. The congress is supposed to issue the declaration- NOT defer it to the executive branch. The war is illegal.
However it was started, we are there now and I have always thought "we should stay until the country stabilizes." But how will we know when that is? After we pull out how long is it going to take for other Islamofacsists to take Iraq back into their control? Who knows? How much longer can we afford to keep it up? Do I really believe that occupying Iraq is the best means of stopping Terrorism? That's ludicrous.
I have always believed that foreign countries hatred of us stems either from jealousy, or because of our democracy, democracy being the enemy of tyranny (which reigns in most of the countries that hate us).
While I still believe that is true, I had never given thought to the stance that Ron Paul takes- that some of these countries are simply fed up with our interventionist policies in other countries. It makes a LOT of sense.
But why are Ron Paul's opposition to the war and opposition to interventional policy reasons for which he is ostracized by the GOP? I will tell you why- it comes down to this. Ron Paul does not "play" politics. He upholds the constitution. Since he does not always support the GOP (because he upholds the constitution and does not cater to corporate/special interests), the GOP (and all of the corporate/special interests that back them) will not support him. What does this translate into? It translates into him getting limited media attention, and the media attention that is given to him being either outright negative, or slanted just enough to get "average" people to dismiss him before the campaigning even starts. Almost every article you read about him either demonizes his supporters, or adds certain buzz-words to him like "isolationist" or "longshot."
Furthermore- this also explains why McCain is doing so well in the Primary. Anyone who calls themselves a conservative, and has listened to ANY talk radio for the last 8 years can tell you that John McCain is a liberal. He has been the GOPs public enemy number 1 for the last 8 years. Why then is he a front-runner? The answer is simple- the GOP did too good of a job selling the war in Iraq to its members. Now people believe that we need to be strong on War, and McCain appears the strongest in that area.
Anyways, I have been searching for over 4 months and have yet to find a serious discussion (from a conservative) on why Ron Paul would be bad for this country. I still fail to see how upholding the constitution, reducing the size of government, removing its control of our lives and reducing the tax burden is not the correct course of action.
I would also like to comment on Ron Paul's supporters. I have seen time and again them being referred to SOLELY as anti-war liberals. I would expect this from the GOP establishment (who won't back him) but hearing it from people on the forums simply shows that most people don't think for themselves anymore. In the last 4 months I have done a LOT of reading from people who support Paul and I would say that the base of his supporters is split 4 ways: conservatives, libertarians, anti-war DEMOCRATS, and former apathetic non-voters who have been inspired by his message. I say anti-war democrats because if they were truly liberal they simply COULD NOT support Ron Paul. He is completely opposed to the liberal agenda. And why should the fact that a significant base of his support be from former democrats? That inspires HOPE in me- it tells me that not all democrats are as brainwashed as I believed them to be. Does this mean I support the rude and immoral behavior of a *few* of his supporters? Absolutely not. I would agree that those individuals along with Paul's stance on the war are two of the biggest obstacles in his campaign.
Another comment I would like to make is on Libertarianism. I will admit I knew little about Libertarians prior to this election. However, the more I think about it, the more I learn about it, the more I think that if conservatives do not concede to libertarians on some issues we are going to continue to lose elections. There are simply TOO MANY people (and the number is growing) who do not believe in the same moral principles that we do (and for the same reasons). I would gladly concede some of these issues (to let them be decided on the state and local levels) and reduce the size of government than to continue to allow the government to grow bigger and bigger and bigger.
So where does that leave me? It leaves me wondering why more conservatives have not taken the path that I have taken. I promise you- if EVERY conservative started voting for the candidate who most closely adheres to their beliefs INSTEAD of voting for who is the most electable, Ron Paul would get the GOP nomination.
Thanks for making it this far,
Nolarond
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 122
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Nolarond only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Nolarond is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Good article. It's frustrating to see people who should be interested in conservatism and Christian principles immersing themselves in apparently purposeful ignorance. To such people, I regularly recommend the articles of Chuck Baldwin. This is his most current. ... http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/baldwin/080129
Paul's economic arguments are fantastic. How economics ties into every issue is amazing, and is the rhetoric that really grabbed me. Prosperity is a result of economic freedom. Economic freedom and personal freedom are inseperable. Everything dovetails in a very intellectually pleasing way with Paul's message. No other candidate is offering this, only disconnected babble, where nothing adds up. Piecmeal answers with no central vision, is all the others offer.
First , thanks for your story. As a dedicated "Paultard" eg a supporter of a 0 chance candidate I still remain happy and focused. Every day RP's message reaches more people and the pol IQ goes up. When polls reflect "face time" on the MSM you know RP has a tough road, buy hey, so did our founders. If GW had listened to the polls in his day we would be English.
Posted By: No Name Supplied
Date: 2008-01-29 22:05:33
I, like you, am a Christian conservative, and glad supporter of Ron Paul. I truly wonder how Christians vote Democrat, and I truly wonder how conservatives can vote for McCain, Giuliani, Romney, or Huckabee.
Nice article - I hope a few more conservatives will note what you say. At this point I don't even care if Paul wins - if only we can lay the path for other conservatives to follow.
Posted By: John C. Randolph
Date: 2008-01-30 06:16:50
The war is not merely illegal, it is unconstitutional. Every member of congress who voted to delegate the war power to the president has violated his oath of office: there's a reason why the power to declare war is reserved to the congress; it's not supposed to be easy to do!
The constitution does not permit any branch of government to assign its powers to another branch. The congress may not allow the courts to appropriate funds. The courts may not allow the executive to try cases at law. The executive may not assign the command of the armed forces to the congress.
If the members of congress want the president to have the power to start a war, then they can propose an amendment to the constitution and see if the states will ratify it. Otherwise, it's their job and nobody else's.
Awesome!!! I agree with you on most that you wrote but especially the part about being shouted down with emotion and bullying by Neo-Cons.
They are worse than liberals in my opinion. Most liberals I know have a lil bit of a heart; Neo-Cons are heartless baby killers with no soul.
This is one of the best articles on Ron Paul that I've read. Thank you.
I can relate to the story inasmuch as I've only been familiar with Ron Paul and his principles for about two weeks now. Prior to that I hadn't been up to speed at all with any of the presidential candidates and I hadn't watched any of the debates, so I really knew very little. Anyway, I had been regularly visiting a financial news website and reading various threads and posts by other readers commenting on the serious concern and state of the U.S. economy. The name Ron Paul kept cropping up in a couple of threads, so I decided to investigate. Within an hour of watching Youtube clips from prior debates I had this epiphany and immediately knew that this was the person I wanted as our next President. No doubt about it. With each passing day I have become increasingly convinced that he is the only hope of bringing about true positive change for our country. I continue to be excited about his message and am very optimistic that he will do well now that Florida is behind us. With Rudy just about gone and Huckabee running out of funds, I look forward to a very entertaining and enlightening debate between Ron Paul, McCain and Romney. We will see some defining moments. McCain and Romney have nowhere to hide now. The mainstream media has ignored Ron Paul to its own detriment. With fewer candidates on stage, Ron Paul's message will be heard by many more new viewers and I think many more connections will be made which will in turn generate more support. Thanks again for the great article.
