morning my mother received a Ron Paul t-shirt from my brother-in-law.
The gift made her giddy as she wants to display to her fellow Floridians
her "Hope for America."
Less enthusiastic was she about my presents though. After unwrapping
the last one, she turned to me with disappointment and said, "Oh,
I figured you'd get me a Paul shirt too." Later that day, she
added to her booty on her own by purchasing another online. The
new one was emblazoned with a quotation from Sinclair Lewis. Sadly,
she rejected my advice to pick up a model proclaiming "Ron
Paul Fo' Shizzle."
my mother here may sound like nepotism (or a desire for bigger and
better gifts), but it is not. People like her showcase the importance
and uniqueness of the Paul candidacy. What makes her story compelling
is that she backed the Democratic Party habitually since 1964 which
was the first year she was eligible to vote. Her moving off the
leftist plantation and appreciation for Dr. Paul's libertarian
ethos indicates why this nation needs him…now, more than ever.
last sentence contained loaded words. "Now more than ever"
is a cliché forever compromised by Richard Nixon using it
as a slogan during his 1972 reelection campaign. Yet the phrase
is topical and draws attention to the statism endemic to both of
our major political parties. Their embrace of steroidal government
is undeniable and all-pervasive. Republican control of Congress
did nothing to alter its course. Indeed, George W. Bush's two terms
in office actually made spending worse.
explains the extent to which George W. Bush has ramped up the size
of the federocracy. His "tenure, however, is a return to the
Johnson and Carter philosophy of budgeting: across-the-board increases
in everything. Inflation-adjusted defense spending is higher today
($440 billion) than it was at the high point of Reagan's defense
buildup ($399.6 billion) and outstrips Johnson's largest Vietnam
War defense budget (421.3 billion). And real non-defense spending
has grown by a total of 25% during Bush's presidency so far, compared
to 15% over Clinton's entire presidency."1
In terms of
the real annual growth rate for federal spending, Bush, at 4.9%,
ranks ahead of all other recent presidents with the exception of
Lyndon Baines Johnson.2 Calling the
43rd president a political conservative is a blatant
non-sequitur. In the midst of this Grand Old Spending Party there
has never been a more opportune moment for a man like Ron Paul to
emerge as the champion of the American people.
place showing in Nevada forced the mainstream media to take
notice. To my great astonishment, I even heard Brit Hume on Fox
News make a special reference to Dr. Paul's positive result — although
this, in no way mitigates the damage caused by the network's perpetual
condescending and shoddy coverage of him. Some pointed
out that it continued again that night in their post-primary
coverage as well.
of his performance out west, to this commentator, he was always
the only option.3 In fact, were it
not for him I would skip going to the polls on Super Tuesday altogether.
I first became aware of him (I am ashamed to admit) only after I
began reading articles at LewRockwell.com
back in 2000. He struck me then, as he does now, as a most rare
form of Republican. He not only had the courage to express his views
but also the courage to defend them. His honesty is what appealed
most to my mother. She asked me if I thought he would run as a third-party
candidate in the general election but then answered her own question
by concluding, "Nah, if he says he won't run then he won't.
He'd only say it if he meant it."
response to Reason's
inquiry about the issues he'd advance on the campaign trail is one
to commemorate. He told them, "Everything I've talked about
for 20 years!" Quips like that illuminate why several conservative
opinion outlets have dismissed him as being a fringe candidate and
a cult figure. Candor, rectitude, and honor are traits unwelcome
in an age of soundbites. Rather than hire pollsters to help him
determine the nature of his beliefs, he simply states them.
which some conservatives have showered upon him indicates just how
threatening his originalist and authentic positions are. He has
to be demeaned because his economic
views would mesmerize the Republican rank-and-file. The last
thing a RINO needs is to be compared to someone who shares the vision
of his constituents. Further, Dr. Paul has resisted Washington's
corruptive and sybaritic influence but the same could never be said
of many of his colleagues.
politician in power for a cycle or two has a "flip-flopping"
problem …but not Ron Paul. The doctor, as opposed to Hillary Clinton,
is the only leader whose election promises us a politics of meaning.
Barack Obama would make a wonderful motivational speaker, but his
"audacity of hope" is nothing but an empty bag of vapor.
Dr. Paul he refuses to go into specifics regarding the precise
nature of his plans. Why would he? There is absolutely nothing exceptional
about Obama in terms of ideology. He loves the federocracy and will
continue to back policies anathema
to conservatives should he find himself in the White House. His
claim of being a uniter is spurious, but if Dr. Paul made the same
boast he would be entirely correct. A bevy of leftists now support
him, and they have made their
reasons for doing so known.
If his campaign
causes the far left to internalize the truth of Thomas Jefferson's
"a government big enough to give you everything you want, is
strong enough to take everything you have" then his run will
have done America incalculable good. All of us benefit when the
ranks of those who regard government as being an ber-charity are
depleted. Ron Paul supporters understand that enlarging the state
diminishes the liberties of the people. The brighter all of our
collective prospects will be when more leftists accept this eventuality.
growth of the Leviathan has reached stage
four. Its metastasizing force has contaminated every area of
our culture and public square. Our bureaucracies already reflexively
disseminate politically correct views and enforce them whenever
possible. It will not be long before our thoughts are habitually
tested for criminal content by the judiciary — witness the Democratic
support for hate crimes legislation.
or right, if you care about the country's future and think liberty
is not a pejorative then Ron Paul is the candidate for you. A vote
for him is a vote America. He embodies what we once were and what
we should always be. Support him in this race and in any race he
runs in the future? Fo' shizzle, my friends, fo' shizzle.
Wild: How Republicans Broke the Bank and Became the Party of Big
Government. (Nashville: Nelson Current, 2006). p.149
- Ibid, 145
- I should
note that I published an interview with John Bootie and dubbed
it, "Teamster for President." I do think a straight-thinking
normal person like Mr. Bootie — free from PC guilt and who has
actually had to deal with people on a regular basis — would be
far superior to most of the candidates out there. However, Dr.
Paul is a better choice. I was asked if I would work on the Bootie
campaign but I declined the invitation.