By and large, even after coming in 2nd in the Iowa Straw Poll, most pundits feel Ron Paul will never get the republican nomination much less ever be elected President. Why? Why is it so widely felt that Paul is unnominatable and unelectable?
Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist and that is not a bad thing, especially considering the ideology of our current President. Obama has, in the eyes of many, trod upon the constitution at every chance. Trod upon it, ignored it, looked for ways around it and claimed it is obsolete, past it’s time, open to interpretation and not to be taken literally.
Ron Paul, in regards to the constitution, is the polar opposite of Barack Obama.
That’s not the problem.
Ron Paul believes the Fed needs to be abolished and needs to be abolished now. That’s not a bad thing either. The Fed is, for all 
sakes and balances, the latest incarnation of the Central Bank. The Central Bank has existed, been abolished, reborn and abolished again. It doesn’t work and neither does the Fed. One can trace many of our economical woes back to the Fed and the Fed can and has, caused artificial inflation by many means.
The Fed needs to go and it needs to go now and Ron Paul is a very vocal advocate of that line of thought.
That’s not the problem.
The tax system in this country needs reforming badly and Ron Paul staunchly preaches that mantra.
Whether it’s a flat tax, a fair tax a value added national sales tax or a combination of those ideas, we must, as Paul advocates, reform the U.S. tax code and the sooner the better.
Okay, that not the problem either.
So what IS the problem with Ron Paul? Why is he not, according to so many, going to get the GOP nomination?
Some of the reasons are political in nature and some reside in other areas.
There ARE problems.
Along with being a strict constitutionalist, Ron Paul is an isolationist and is as strict in that ideology as he is in his strong stance regarding the constitution.
That’s a problem.
Isolationism doesn’t work. Ron Paul believes the United States must remove itself from the world stage, stop assisting in the foreign affairs of our allies, stop sending monetary assistance to nations in need, and leave the world alone.
To see the failures of isolationist policies one need look no farther than to China or Japan. Both used to be isolationist countries and neither began to see growth and economic prosperity until they emerged from it. Indeed, a strong case against isolationism can be made siting our own history. Between WWI and WWII, the U.S. exhibited isolationist policies and it can be rightly argued that those very policies added fuel to the fires which brought about WWII. It was, in fact, the bombing of Pearl Harbor by an isolationist oriented Japan, which took the U.S. to war and also put an end to our isolationism.
Why would we want to return to policies which failed other nations and our own? Ron Paul wants to do just that and that is a big problem.
Ron Paul can see nothing wrong with a rogue nation such as Iran, attaining a nuclear weapon. That’s a problem.
Iran, a state sponsor of terrorism has for years, stated publicly that Israel should be wiped from the world map. They have started and nearly completed a nuclear energy program and are using the byproducts of it to gain nuclear weapons. By their own accounts and the accounts of others, they are very close to success in that arena. A rogue nation such as Iran has a much, much greater likelihood of using such weapons in offensive strikes than other nations now in possession of such weapons. It’s also been made reasonably clear by the leaders in Iran, that they want Israel removed from existence.
If you add 1 and 1 and don’t come up with the total of 2, you are doing something grossly wrong and yet, to Ron Paul, a nuclear armed Iran is A-Okay.
That’s a HUGE problem.
That problem naturally leads to the accusations that Ron Paul is anti-semitic. Is he? Maybe…maybe not but he has clearly vocalized and exhibited anti Israel rhetoric and behavior over the years.
Ron Paul is staunchly against offering any sort of aid to Israel and while that goes hand in hand with his isolationist views it must be seen in context of other Ron Paul activities. In 2009, Paul rose and spoke emphatically against a house resolution expressing support for Israel’s invasion of Gaza and the labeling of Hamas as a terrorist organization.
During Ron Paul’s campaign for President in 2008, he accepted and kept a donation from the leader of a brash Neo Nazi organization and white supremacist, Don Black.
While examples of this sort of behavior could continue, one must realize that if, indeed, Ron Paul is NOT anti-semitic, it can be accurately said that he has little if any use for Israel and as Israel IS the only true democracy in the middle east and as they ARE our strongest ally in the entire region…
That too is a HUGE problem.
Clearly, to be an effective President, one must be a leader and to be effective as a leader one must be likable. Ron Paul is not very likable and that’s a problem.
As a nation, as conservatives, we’re not looking for a Pied Piper to blindly follow. That’s what got our nation Obama. We are looking for a leader who speaks plainly, who encourages us to great things, whose words and demeanor calm and inspire. Ron Paul berates an audience and there is little doubt, that as a President, he would berate the people.
Examples of this can easily be found in his speeches, and clearly in his responses to debate questions. A calm moderator asks a question and Paul’s response comes across as angry, berating and frustrated. If a viewer believes the moderator’s question to be a valid one then such a response is perceived by the viewer as though Ron Paul is berating that viewer.
More often than not, way more often than not, Paul is shouting and looking angry when speaking. Paul doesn’t TELL us his platform he YELLS it at us.
That is a problem.
Let’s not forget the Ron Paul followers. In this day of social media, Ronbots as they are increasingly referred to as, have taken on a very different and difficult approach. Ron Paul, while he runs as a republican is, in fact, a libertarian and that alone is not a bad thing, but, in an accelerated way, the libertarian party is being consumed by anarchists and that is a problem.
Anarchists, for whatever reason support Ron Paul and advocate for, not smaller government, rather, NO government. Anarchy leads to chaos and chaos is plainly not the answer to our nation’s woes. It is the isolationist theory on steroids.
Not all, but the vast majority of Ronbots in social media would rather provoke an argument that start a discussion by making baseless accusations against conservatives and by labeling any non Ronbot a neo con or a RINO. Here are some examples of that:
1) “So how do you tell what a neo-con will be talking about tomorrow, that’s easy watch fox news today.”
2) “yea! Let’s go to war with Iran, even tho they don’t have a WMD, or a stable govt, a stable military, or even a good infrastructure. They don’t attack people, but let’s kill them all! A few people from there threatened Israel! And we care more about Israel then our own country!
These are not conversation starters. These are belligerent and argumentative and those who follow Ron Paul are resorting to these opening salvos more and more often. Conservatives interested in turning this country around are put off by completely by these tactics.
That’s a problem.
Finally, for all the admonishing of Ronbots to Tea Party activists for not seeing things their way, Ron Paul is not a Tea Party guy. Ron Paul is a libertarian.
Ron Paul, despite claims of Ronbots, did not start the Tea Party Movement. That movement actually began back in 1773 in Boston with a ship load of tea and a harbor.
Yes, in 2007, Ron Paul held a “protest” on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party but he did not form an organization of political influence that day…he held what is referred to as a money bomb to raise funds for his presidential campaign.
The fact is, the organization of the Tea Party started in early 2009 when a post on a website forum by someone going by the name of Gmack urged readers to mail tea bags to congress in protest of Obama’s plans to hike taxes.
Ron Paul had less to do with forming the current Tea Party than Al Gore had to do with the invention of the internet and that will surely set Ronbots everywhere into a vibrating fit.
Tea Party faithful will have a commanding presence in determining the GOP nominee for 2012 and nobody is going to win the White House without the support of independent voters. A bunch of anarchist leaning Ronbots poking Tea Party faithful with sharp sticks and following a belligerent, isolationist candidate who advocates against our strongest ally in the Middle East while yelling at and berating the masses, while claiming he created the Tea Party movement will garner the support of neither of those important groups in numbers enough to win either the nomination or the White House.
While Ron Paul, at least constitutionally, is the anti Obama, in a dangerous world and a deeply divided populous is a bucket of cold water poised over a pot of boiling oil.
That is a problem.
If Ron Paul falls in a forest, his supporter(s) will claim it’s because gravity is inherently unconstitutional.
Without a doubt Herman Cain only did the GOP and himself a disservice in this debate. I mean how foolish do you have to be in order to be caught in a plain lie like this during a national debate. He with out a doubt said that he was against the Fed Audits which i think should have been done long ago but then denied it outright. Even though i dislike Ron Paul i have to say he took this debate.
Pingback: blue eyes white dragon deck
My father sent this to me billed as a “balanced article on Ron Paul.” I don’t know if I’d call this article — mischievously entitled “The Problem(s) With Ron Paul” — a “balanced” one. He starts off by throwing the TEN-term Congressman a small bone by complimenting Paul’s economic platform before taking his knife and fork to Ron Paul’s character by essentially suggesting the following: Ron Paul is a Jew-hating, surly misanthrope who yells at everyone and wants women, children and puppies in other countries to die. This mostly unfriendly, adversarial essay is most definitely NOT balanced, fair, or even particularly persuasive. Which is bad for a persuasive piece of writing.
Ron Paul is NOT anti-Semitic; in fact proud anti-Semites everywhere consider him their ENEMY and a staunch supporter of the mythical “Zionist-Occupied Government” — http://jewishracism.blogspot.com/2008/01/ron-pauls-radical-zionism-comes-out-in.html . That right there should be a feather in his cap if you are stuck on this “Ron Paul hates Israel” argument. In this video, Dr. Paul explains how he is completely in favor of acting in the best interest of Israel, but feels that with over 300 nuclear weapons, Israel is completely ready to crush any opponent (especially a joke like Iran, the little nuclear engine that could). If by some chance Israel did need our support, a Ron Paul presidency would treat them FAIRLY, i.e., not FAVOR them over every other country on earth. It is everyone’s planet, not just Israel’s and America’s.
And Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist (which this writer uses almost as a derogatory word); he is a NON-INTERVENTIONIST — it is very different. When America butts in to everyone’s problems (everyone = those with oil/$$$), it causes only problems for us — and we have too many problems of our own that NEED FIXING NOW.
The way America has acted in recent history has been like the behavior of a schizophrenic off his meds. It’s like a person who is on fire going around trying to save other people’s marriages. It’s insane, and Dr. Paul is the OPPOSITE.
The Israeli foreign policy argument is an irrelevant, strawman argument clearly devised to focus attention away from the fact that MOST AMERICANS AGREE WITH RON PAUL ABOUT THE ECONOMY, and given half a chance to think for themselves, WOULD ACTUALLY VOTE FOR RON PAUL OVER BARACK OBAMA.
We are mired in a maelstrom of liberal insanity and economic terror that pervades the American psyche in 2011. It’s the economy, stupid. Yes, perhaps Ron Paul could suffer because of the non-interventionist aspect of his platform, but his stance on the economy is vastly superior to Romney and company. Not only do people need to listen to him, they need to vote for him as well.
Nobody else (GOP-wise) has the BALLS to actually pitch the big ideas (like ending the Federal Bank of Incompetence, encouraging sound money, etc.) at debates, on the campaign trail, or at any other time, really, but that is another story.
But if you’re fixated on Israel, just watch Ron Paul tell it in his own words (far more succinctly and directly, mind you, than most candidates ever are during such off-the-cuff little exchanges as this):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4Jn2xCF92Y
Finally, this article also implies that Ron Paul is wholly unlikeable, a villain even, which makes him seem like Richard Nixon or worse, John McCain. That is utter nonsense; Ron Paul is not, as the article claims, some kind of rageaholic who berates people and scares children. The man is a DOCTOR! He’s delivered over 4,000 babies.
Do you know how discriminating pregnant, emotional women are in choosing a doctor to deliver their babies?
Do you think maybe they chose Dr. Paul for a reason?
The guy is even-tempered, calm, collected, and has EONS of EXPERIENCE. How do you beat a newbie with a powerful message like Obama? WITH EXPERIENCE AND AN EVEN MORE POWERFUL MESSAGE. And, best of all, we KNOW Ron Paul. His ideas and background are WELL-DOCUMENTED, not like Obama’s. Ron Paul can BEAT Obama. And if Tea Partiers are so adamant about getting rid of Obama, this is their chance.
Ron Paul is feisty as hell, and can whip Congress into shape one way or another. I would trust him to deliver my unborn babies, and I would trust him in times of crisis in general. No man is perfect, or the perfect candidate. But this guy makes Romney & Perry look like Beavis & Butthead. And FYI, the GOP is ABSOLUTELY NOT locked down to those two men, no matter what they preach on FOX. Even Hermie Cain, the pizza guy, won a straw poll in Florida. (I bet my dad is jazzed about that one down in Jacksonville.)
http://www.radioiowa.com/2011/09/25/santorum-says-gop-dissatisfied-with-perceived-front-runners/
The nomination is still ANYBODY’S GAME. And as we get closer to realizing that nobody else can really do the job (i.e. beat Obama, fix the economy STAT), the long-time longshot & lifetime underdog will come to the forefront of the national conversation. I guarantee it. “Why NOT Ron Paul?” Just watch.
By the way, nice picture guy. You look like Osama Ben Hogan. Just kidding (not really).
How can anyone trust an article making ludicrous claims like: “as Israel IS the only true democracy in the Middle-East”? Israel is a rogue state supported by powerful friends and conducts acts of war and genocide against Palestine, that’s ‘state war’ all supported by each and every president. Maybe Egypt and some other Arab some nations could have a chance had they not had puppet dictators installed by…guess who?
What is to be expected of a website that attracts commentary like that of “Whit” above who thinks Barack Obama is implementing communism? It’s an insane mixture of hyperbole and delusion.insane.
Like most things in life, there is an element of truth to all the comments here. Some are more on target, some are barely on target. The meat of Craig’s article is on target. I wish he had put more focus on what I perceive as the most applicable issue in the entire election debate–FAILURE is NOT an OPTION!!! 4 more years of Barry O. is a Death Sentence for America as we know it. He has shown that as well as he has PROVEN 2 things–1. He has NO CONSCIENCE when it comes to out & out LYING- he is EXCELLENT at it!! 2. He is willing to do WHATEVER IT TAKES to implement his plan for how he and his gang will “CHANGE AMERICA” …and his radical agenda of a mixture of Socialism & Communism is NOT what America or Americans want , nor does the rest of the free world. To sum it up, Ron Paul is somewhat on target with regards to economic issues, but he can’t win..and here’s why–People do business with people they like. A yelling, angry old man is NOT endearing to most sane people. It will take a consummate personable excellent communicator to defeat not just Obama, but the Obama Machine. Sad, not the way we should elect our president, but it is the way it is. So, for once, we ALL MUST make SOME concessions this ONE TIME for the greater good of the country and ALL-ALL must come together behind the MOST ELECTABLE, likable, awesome communicator to defeat the enemy of the future of our Free , Representative Republic!! After the Debate the other night-to me, Newt Gingrich is the most likely to fill the requirements. He is the best schooled scholar in American History and Government of all running on both sides, he has a successful record of winning and balancing budgets, and he can deliver a speech while landing a gut punch to the opponent while doing it with class and composure—THAT’S Presidential!!
I didn’t know that.
I am more afraid of our own Govt, than Iran with a bomb or some man in a cave somewhere. I am 49 years old and this country has been conducting war most of my life. You know Iran would most likely be our ally if we had not overthrown there elected govt. and put in place a dictator in the 50’s And I am willing to bet we would have the same feeling if someone tried to do that here. And as for world war one. The Lusitania was a war ship. And the Germans even took out adds in the news papers warning people not to travel on it. But I guess Mr. Gracills thinks the Gulf of Tonken was a real attack too. I love how everybody loves fear fear fear.
I saw Ron Paul on the debate the other night giving a green light for Nuclear Weapons capability for Iran. Ron needs to get to town more often, he is really out of touch. I would just add that it was not Woodrow Wilson who got us into World War 1, it was Germany and their bombing of the ocean liner, the Lusitania. And until his supporters can figure out how to suppress the Global Jihad under Ron Paul’s rules, I think they should stop pretending they know what they are talking about. Great article Craig, we cannot afford to have another mistake in the White House. Ron Paul would be a very deadly mistake.
I’m not sure if my good Friend Pastor Westcott has seen this article but he has experienced it. Here is his latest Facebook Post regarding this same subject:
Randy Westcott
I’d have to say that Dr. Paul’s biggest problem, besides his position on a nuclear Iran is his supporters. As much as I like and respect Dr. Paul’s position on many issues (I am a conservative Libertarian after all) I have grown annoyed with his supporters nearly as much. They have created a cult of personality nearly as rabid as the Obamazombies. They speak in rhetorical soundbites like ad hawkers selling Sham Wow! If I had a dollar for every time I or someone who disagrees with them was called stupid tool or puppet I’d be a very rich man. Very rarely is there anything substantive and what passes for discourse from them is advertising hyperbole. Even advertising copywriters are warned about over hyping product with glowing unsubstantiated claims. Rep. Paul’s supporters hurt his credibility, and their own with the relentless talking points and colorful embellishment.
Do you know the difference between isolationism and non-interventionism? One has to do with trade, the other is foreign policy.
The US was not “isolationist” before the bombing of Pearl Harbor. We were providing air cover to the Chinese during the Second Sino/Japanese War. Ever hear of the American Volunteer Groups? The Flying Tigers? Thanks FDR.
Israel is not our strongest ally in the region, Turkey is. Turkey was preventing the spread of Communism into the Middle East while Israel was plotting to blow up American movie theaters in Egypt in an attempt to suck us into a war.
The US was truly isolationist just prior to WWI. Woodhead Wilson decided to get us into WWI and passed the Federal Reserve Act and reinstated the federal income tax. Thanks Woody.
If you favor Welfare and warfare then by all means, vote for one of the mainstream candidates. They are all guaranteed to continue the current Welfare/warfare system. If you fear freedom and liberty, then vote for one of the mainstream candidates, because they are all guaranteed to place restrictions on them.
We can easily remove all of our troops from the Middle East and let all of those people kill each other if they so desire. That is their choice. Our borders can be easily secured for a small fraction of what we are spending today.
For most of the 20th century, it was progressive democrats that started wars. Why do you wish to imitate the likes of Woodrow Wilson, FDR and Harry S Truman?
This in no way is a representation of the Dr. RON PAUL, that I have supported for office,since his first bid in my home. District 22 in Texas . I am not a ronbot,can not even find the word in the dictionary! I am a grassroots supporter and will continue to be!
Your blinded biased rhetoric is not based on Dr. Ron Pauls, records nor legislation bills he has stood for in Congress for the last 25years!
May I also leave you a link to an article that you might be must interested in ,that fits right into Dr.Ron Paul’s ideas of liberty for the AMERICAN CITIZEN.
The Line in the Sand. THE UNITED STATES vs. The United States. february 27,2011 @ 11:50am> The Warrior. http:/thelineinthesand.net/2011/02/27/the-u