When I see the current pool of Republican candidates who are vying for the nomination, initially, I laugh. After the hysterics wear off, I become troubled. Is this what our country has come to? Are people like Rick Perry and Rick Santorum really the kinds of candidates people would vote for? The kind who see no problem with legislating morals and religion? It doesn't make any sense to me at all, because Republicans supposedly run on a platform of less government intervention, but there they are proposing even more government regulations on very personal and private lifestyle choices.
Those who are Libertarians claim that Dr. Ron Paul (R-TX) is actually a viable choice, but when you look more deeply into his record (minus the newsletter fiasco) and beliefs, he becomes less palatable, as well. Sure, he strongly advocates the legalization of pot and wants us to get out of Afghanistan. In my opinion, those are both worthy and noble causes, which I support fully. But did you know Dr. Paul also rejects climate change and in 2003 claimed that CO2 comes from oceans? (Hint, it doesn't).
Let's run down a list of why Democrats who might be disenchanted with Obama should think twice about voting for Ron Paul:
- Dr. Paul wants to eliminate the Dept. of Education. This means no student loans for underprivileged graduates, no grants, no other means of support for those who want to go to college. In essence, he basically thinks that if you don't have the money to pay for an education, then too bad. You're out of luck.
- He wants to end programs such as Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. So those who are elderly, disabled, and extremely poor will be pretty much out in the cold in terms of assistance. He believes that the poor should rely on churches and the generosity of individual charity. The problem with that is, churches are often stretched thin as it is, and many individuals don't make charitable contributions regularly. Eliminating these programs would essentially increase the number of indigent people on the streets.
- Paul wants to sell all of our National Parks to the highest bidder so they could be privately own. Can you imagine Yellowstone National Park being sold to a private company, only to have it ravaged for its natural resources? It would only be a matter of time before it happened.
- He claims to believe in less government intervention, and he claims he would never let his religious beliefs interfere with policy making, but in March 2011, Dr. Paul introduced a bill to Congress called "The Sanctity of Life Act," which says that life begins at conception. If this bill passed, it would effectively make abortion murder. This is a widely-accepted view in the Evangelical Christian community.
- He does not believe that recent changes in global climate are the result of human activity. He is a climate change denier.
- He believes the Environmental Protection Agency should be done away with and no regulations should be in place to protect us from harmful pollutants. Do you really want to live in a world where the air is always smoggy? If you don't think we'd have that problem, just look at Beijing, China. They have some of the worst pollution in the world because they have almost no laws to regulate it.
- In 2009, Dr. Paul introduced a bill that would have exempted religious institutions from any Federal rulings, essentially crippling the Judicial branch. This bill would put churches above the law. Now, I have nothing against churches and religion, but this is just wrong, wrong, wrong! So, basically, the man does not believe in separation of Church and State, and has made that very clear in the past.
This isn't everything about Ron Paul that troubles me, but it should give you a really good idea as to what he really is all about. He's not really a Libertarian. Paul is just another Ayn Randian "every man for himself" evangelical Christian bent on forcing his own beliefs on the populace.