Hey friends. I’m in NYC for orientation but my attention, I have to admit, has been on the Iowa caucus (see results) and upcoming New Hampshire primary. There were a few surprises and upsets in Iowa: Obama took the win and Edwards edged out Clinton for second place; Romney was beat by Huckabee; and a Congressman from Texas, Dr. Ron Paul, held on, coming in fifth in the Republican race.
I decided to do a little research on Dr. Paul to find out what his deal is, and when I did, I learned several new things. While he’s a Republican and most of us associate that party with the Iraq situation, he doesn’t support it and wants to bring the troops home immediately. On the topic, he said this: “Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America.” For more of his foreign policy views, I included a link.
Another thing I realized about Paul which probably makes him attractive to Gen Y (as seen by his enormous campus presence) is he’s outspoken, seemingly honest and a strict advocate for the Constitution.
He wants to abolish the Federal Reserve (our central bank) and he claims we are moving towards a North American Union (think EU). He blasts the idea of creating a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) superhighway from Texas, through Kansas and into Canada (for more efficient trade) because of his strong view that we need to hold onto our national sovereignty.
Then there are ways he sticks to the Republican party lines. He’s pro-life, and no where on his web site could I find information about his position on gay rights/civil unions. He also distances himself from socialized medicine.
If you want to learn more about Paul, I’ve included some of his paid for advertising spots on YouTube. For a quick spot, check out this one: We the People commercial, to laugh but be (slightly informed) check out this one and for a legit news segment, check this NBC’s Nightly News segment.
2 Responses to “An Unusual Republican in Ron Paul”
January 8th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Since you’re not at work, i’ll make my predictions here and see if i can go 2/2:
NH
Dems:
1. Obama
2. Edwards
3. Clinton
I think Clinton is done in NH, people don’t want a president who’s about to cry.
Repub:
1. McCain
2. Romney
3. Thompson
4. Giuliana/Huckabee (close)
January 9th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
(sorry for the diatribe)
On the free-trade super highway, let us not forget the Republican party of yesteryear. The republicans were once liberals. Clearly not because of who marries whom or if Sara can slaughter a week-old fetus, but because of their liberal stance on trade and the openness of America and its borders. A brief argument in favor of an American Union (other than its acronym would probably be AmUn, which the NRA would love).
As unpatriotic as it may sound, I feel no specific affinity for Americans. I like my compatriots, but I think it just as sad to hear about an Iraqi death as an American death on the news (perhaps more so, but that’s another diatribe). In the same logic, I do not think Americans should reap all the benefits of economic growth. The pure capitalist model (Smith’s invisible hand) does not have barriers to trade, and the gains flow freely to all participants of the world’s economy (okay, most). Opening America’s borders to Latin America will certainly cause a period of crazy restructuring. The end impact of such an act would be not only an increase in the both countries’ standards of living, but, a slow convergence in amongst the rich and poor nations.
Let us take the example of the European Union. Would anyone, 20 years ago, have thought Estonia, Slovakia, and Latvia to be growing near 10% annually? Or that at the same time standards of living would continue to increase in the spoiled (read: Western) EU countries? The European Union allowed sharply-increased levels of trade between the poor and the wealthy nations of the European Union, and the convergence in standards of living has been remarkable. Holland has not become poorer (indeed, quite the opposite occurred), but rather the poor nations of (mainly Eastern) Europe have become wealthy. The buzzword democracy circled and landed throughout Russia’s backyard, and the nations are staunchly pro-West (well, pro- capitalism, EU, Canada; maybe not so pro-America; thanks Georgie).
While I like being a spoiled American boy, previously living in the wealthiest nation (but still the greatest, proudest, and most gas-guzzling) in the world, I think we should take a ’share the wealth card’ in the game of life. Furthermore, I don’t think increases in others’ standards of living will come at a cost to America’s economy, rather it will be a mutually-beneficial relationship.
I yearn for a Republican party; not the gay-bashing, rifle-toting, bible-beating (or beating people with bibles) I currently have access to. Where are the economic liberals today? Everyone wants to kick out all our immigrants (not to mention, the debate is not really about illegal immigration, but rather just immigration in itself. Hear anyone talking about just raising the permissible numbers? No, that would be political suicide). I think we should open the borders. I want cheap products! How about a legally-hired housekeeper? Or how about an opportunity for our less-fortunate neighbors to earn a buck or live on our street (metaphorical or physical).
Leave a Reply