Guest MINDSETTER™ Jeff Scott: Ron Paul is the Right Choice for RI
Monday, April 23, 2012
Rhode Islanders will head to the ballot box Tuesday and Republican voters will decide which GOP candidate for the Presidency best represents their beliefs, principles, and values.
What are the beliefs, principles, and values of the Republican Party today? Excuse me for coming off as a seemingly bitter supporter of Republican Congressman Ron Paul, but it seems as if they can be summed up in one simple statement - "Obama must be defeated." I agree. It's my belief that President Barack Obama has been one of the worst Presidents in American history.
But, what does this statement imply? My understanding is that I'm supposed to vote for anyone, as long as they aren't Barack Obama and have an R next to their name. I've heard this statement echoed so many times in defense of Republican candidate Mitt Romney as a reason to support his candidacy that I've generally accepted it as the excuse I'm to use should he become the nominee, and should I vote for him.GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST
Supporting Congressman Ron Paul comes with many obstacles, just like many things in life. It's much like being a Tea Party member; they are labeled and dismissed as racist meanies who attend Aryan support groups and hate poor people. On a side note, thank you, Senator Whitehouse, that line always makes me laugh but I'd love to know what an Aryan support group actually is because I'm always left with a mental image of Edward Norton in Fight Club, imagining a bunch of Nazis consoling one another. But I digress. Republicans in general have their own labels and stereotypes. The difference is that I am labeled and dismissed by my own party and, ironically, asked to support the party, simultaneously. Fortunately, for me, nature blessed me with a very thick skin. While I am not offended, I am amused by this conundrum. It's like trying to get a date with a woman with insults and slander.
The most common slur is the term "Paulbot". I prefer "Ronulan" purely for comedic value, but both are akin to "Obamazombie". They imply a blind following of a leader. I can speak only for myself and almost every Ron Paul supporter I've come across - this term is far off the mark. I've never met a more informed group of people before and, more importantly to me, they will tell you their view on any position and explain in detail why they think the way that they do. These views were developed and hardened over time and not by memorizing Ron Paul's views and talking points. A strong majority of us do not support his candidacy because we support what he believes. It's the exact opposite; he happens to support our beliefs, principles, and values, all of which were determined prior to his candidacy after years of reading the works of our founders and the brilliant thinkers who influenced them, self-educating ourselves in free market economics and the Austrian school, and learning about the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the principles of individual liberty. We're passionate about our beliefs and love to argue and defend them.
We're also labeled bigots or anti-semitic for our foreign policy views. This slander may be the closest to actually offending me than any other, and not because of the misconceptions implied in regard to policy. No, this instance of name calling represents a fundamental ignorance of Libertarianism. Libertarianism is first and foremost maximizing individual liberty which is not subject to who you are nor what you believe. It's a silly notion to label someone a Libertarian while at the same time anti-semitic because of their foreign policy views. A Libertarian foreign policy would apply to China and Israel equally. If Canada were concerned about a threat from Iran, a Libertarian would consider it none of our business, unless we are attacked.
Rather than tossing around labels and calling people names, dismissing them as they might have a different view on an issue than the mainstream Republican Party, have an open mind and determine those beliefs of which we do have in common. I will tell you quite confidently that we have more in common than you do with Mitt Romney. The problem is determining where one draws the line.
The most important issues today are economic. Being a businessman does not necessarily make someone the logical choice when the economy is the number one problem. That is another common line parroted as a qualification for Mitt Romney's candidacy by many, and it makes me wonder if they would also claim the same were Warren Buffet or Jeffrey Immelt running for the Republican nomination. Being proven right as time and policies play out is a qualification. Having the right ideas and being consistent in your support of those ideas is a qualification, as well as articulating them in a way which shows your considerable knowledge of them. These qualifications can be attributed to Ron Paul, but not Mitt Romney. You can say that Mitt Romney is a consistent Conservative, but not with a straight face.
In regards to economics, Mr. Romney has flip flopped on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, monetary policy, the Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, stimulus spending, TARP, and, in general, the role of government in a free market economy. We have already had a so-called Conservative Republican President with the nerve to say, "I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market system," and that is exactly what President George W. Bush did. How's that working out for us?
We must not forget that it was a Republican President who gave us a new entitlement program, doubled the size of the Department of Education, stimulus checks in the attempt to boost the economy, and TARP. I would argue that President Bush has done far more to damage our free market system than President Obama ever could because he introduced a new level of central planning and spending to Conservatism and the Republican Party, greasing the skids for President Obama, and allowed the enemies of free market Capitalism to blame all of our economic problems on "the past eight years" of free market Capitalism.
On Tuesday, I will be supporting the only Presidential candidate who has made accurate economic predictions during his public life. I will be supporting the candidate who has never strayed from the principles of free market Capitalism nor shrank in the defense thereof. I will be supporting the candidate who best represents what it is I claim to believe in and have advocated passionately rather than accepting a minimal level of commonality and make excuses for his shortfalls and flip flops because conventional wisdom tells us to nominate a moderate. John McCain isn't running in 2012 and, just for good measure, if beating President Obama were my only concern, I'm not so sure the man who lost to the man who lost to President Obama in 2008 is the most logical choice. Ron Paul is my choice.
