12.13.2007

GTKTPRFP - Ron Paul: Part I: (Seriousness Level: Severe)

*Disclaimer - For every candidate I’m going to devote 2 hours to look over their opinions on key issues and pointing out where I disagree. Then I’ll be looking at the major issues playing in the media that will dissuade people from voting for them. I’m trying to summarize thoughts, so please don’t take my words as absolute fact. If you have any grips with my summary, please look to the candidate’s website for their official opinion. This is my interpretations from 2 hours ONLY. I reserve the right to change my opinion as this proceeds.



Baseball Card Statistics:

Full Name: Ronald Ernest Paul
Age: 72
Marital Status: Wife, Carol – Married for 50 years
Party Affiliation: Republican
Most Recent Office Held: US Congressman from Texas
College: Duke
Religious Affiliation: Baptist
Eric’s Official Nickname: Rupaul
Official Candidate website: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
Randomness: He recently had the largest one-day fundraiser in US history.

Pre-issue thoughts

I’ll be honest. Rupaul’s opinions are powerful. He’s a Republican candidate that has previously been endorsed by the Constitution Party and ran for president in 1988 as the Libertarian candidate. He walks across party lines and stands up for what HE believes in. I really feel like he loves this country more than anything and sometimes that gets him into trouble. Reading through his statements on issues, for every opinion I loved, the next I disagreed with, maybe hated. Like when he said 9/11 was kind of our fault. Yeah, that’s not very good. I would love to talk with Rupaul for about 5 hours, but I’m not sure yet if I’d want him to be my president.

Interesting Issue Watch

Global Diplomacy: To cut to the chase, Rupaul thinks that the US should not be a part of any international body in which decisions are ultimately made for the US, i.e. the United Nations. Quote time: “Under no circumstances should the U.S. again go to war as the result of a resolution that comes from an unelected, foreign body, such as the United Nations.” Rupaul goes on to imply that he likes the idea of the U.N. for diplomacy sake, but not where an international body can vote to make laws for our country. Hmm…how to respond to this? I agree that other countries should not be making decisions for us, but we have to get global input before we take actions with global impact. I don’t think he’s promoting an isolationism policy, but we can’t just shut our doors and pretend everything outside is ok. Speaking of shutting doors…

Immigration: Let’s allow Rupaul to throw the first couple grenades. These two come out of his six point plan for immigration reform.

1) Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.

2) End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.

I vote for a climbing wall to be placed around the Canadian and Mexican borders. Then we can use our American Gladiators to race up and pull them down before they get over. This worked in the early 90s and it will work today. Have I told you I’m excited about NBC bringing back that show?
About the birthright issue: It’s clearly stated in the controversial 14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” So Rupaul is calling to amend an amendment to get the constitution back to an earlier state. It’s like trying to triple stamp a double stamp.

Iraq/Patriot Act: I gave this its own area; because I think it’s worth nothing that Rupaul is a rare Republican that has always been against the war in Iraq and the Patriot Bill (he voted against both). I as a God fearing Republican hippy have always been afraid to say how much I despise the idea of the Patriot Bill and the war in Iraq. So I feel a pretty good connection here. As a disclaimer, I think our military should always be supported at times like these. We all have friends or family that’s been impacted. Anti-war does not mean Anti-soldiers. It’s a shame our troops are over there without a long-term solution for the region. That’s all. A couple great points by Rupaul:

“The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. This war has cost more than 3,000 American lives, thousands of seriously wounded, and hundreds of billions of dollars. Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations.”

Was Saddam good for the world; of course not. But if you’re taking him down, you gotta go after a list of dictators that are equally punishing their people. One site estimates the cost of the war at $400 billion dollars or $4,100 per household. Yeesh. For Rupaul, this issue is more of an "I told you so". I don't like that he can use this example to rule out justified international action at a later date though.

And the Patriot Act. It was sold to us at a time of fear as a way to protect us. It’s even got a name that suggests that if you’re against it, you’re a nazi. Look, I don’t want to get into an ends justifies the means argument. Who knows how many lives its saved. But there has to be a point where you stop giving up civil liberties to the government. If somebody busted into your house tonight without a warrant, cited the Patriot Act, what would you say? I would probably start by hiding all my Cat Stevens albums.

Eric’s Gut Feeling After 2 Hours of Research

I think Rupaul is a great Congressman. He is somebody who is not afraid to offer a dissenting opinion in times when public pressures are clouding long-term judgment. I’m very bothered by some things he says. He’s very intent on protecting the US at all costs. I think he may resist entering into future international affairs that we need to be involved in. In Washington and Jefferson’s time, the world was a very big place. It probably took 3 years to get from Independence, Missouri to Oregon. And even then you would have to hunt buffalo and make sure you didn’t come down with cholera or get a snake bite. Now, innovations have made the world smaller, a place where the US needs be a world player.

The question I’m asking myself now is: Do I want a leader who leads by a set of personal beliefs and who is not afraid to offend a part of the country to put them into practice?

Eric’s Official Rating

Rupaul is very polarizing. Somebody I really respect said he is crazy and would never vote for him. Some other people seem to be very intrigued at what this man is fully about. I’m going to give him an 84 at this point. At the very least, he makes Mittens look boring and bland. I want to learn more about him, the good and bad.

I may be very naïve to consider voting for him, but regardless, he’s very good for this 2008 race and will hopefully force the other candidates to come out of their shells a bit more.
Tomorrow Afternoon: Fred Thompson

6 comments:

William Sawyer said...

Very good review. RuPaul (again a great nickname) is very attractive about 90% of the time. Smaller government, get rid of the Department of Education (A GREAT IDEA) strong borders. All great things, however he scares me when he talks about isolationism. We can not as a super power isolate ourselves from problems. There are also a couple social issues that bother me about him. The fact that a good number of his supporters are 9/11 conspiracy theorist kinda freaks me out too.

Good conclusion...great Congressman, but for me, not a good President.

Court said...

Eric... very interesting. I don't know a ton about Ron Paul, but he is very intriguing. Almost of fresh air with all the not so great candidates we have this election.

Court said...

Oh I forgot that your wife is a genius. Shannon you're a genius!

McDuff said...

This was very insightful, all I new before I read this article was that "RuPaul" was a hippie running for President who cannot afford good yard signs. I was wrong, he is a true hippie that I believe just wants his opinion heard (as he speaks for others as well). Very interesting article, I like him a little more but still would not vote for him.

Anonymous said...

You can't triple stamp a double stamp.

Bob McCarty Writes said...

George Mitchell's report -- and the reactions to it -- caused me to wonder how professional baseball might be different if Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul withdrew from the race for the White House and, instead of serving as commander in chief, replaced Bud Selig as commissioner of baseball. What if Ron Paul was Commissioner of Baseball? >