Or so that's what his campaign website says. I've been involved in an election discussion with some friends on a message board, and someone had this to say about his support for the Congressman:
anyone who hears him speak really can't argue against him. his foreign policy, his fiscal policy, his libertarian principles; all perfect in my eyes.
Ron Paul, the perfect candidate? I don't think so. There's no point in dragging this into a point-by-point breakdown of his platform. Votes for candidates are very rarely line-item votes, and it's the totality of the candidate that needs to or should be considered at the end of the day.
So, that being said, I would argue that Ron Paul is about as far as perfect for the office of President of the United States at this point in history. I emphasize that because it's a very important part of what I'm trying to say. My reasoning? Currently, the political climate in the US is one of the most-polarized ever. The divide between left and right really can't get any further.
Obviously, the first person to blame is always going to be the one at the top, so President Bush is partly responsible. On the other side, the leadership of the Democrat party has seen fit to go beyond conscientious objection to a flat-out agenda of discrediting and condemning every step of the Administration, and "merits" responsibility as well. Nobody's an angel in the current context, in spite of what either the far right or the far left will try to tell you.
I feel that Congressman Paul's platform, while containing some very astute points and proposals, will only serve to further deepen the divide. There are very few parts of his platform that one can look at objectively and say "Now this will bring the country together." The key issues for him are ones where he seeks no compromises. It's a courageous approach, but simply will not work today.
Visionary? In some ways, yes.
Electable? Doubtful.
Perfect? No.
I admire Congressman Paul for his willingness to champion some portions of his platform, but I cannot and will not support a candidate whose message stubbornly refuses to budge for the sake of trying to bring the country together. To do that, you need compromise, and maybe I'm mistaken, but I just don't see it in his platform.
|