Ron Paul from a Liberal Perspective and As a Republican Candidate for 2012

OpEdNews

Ron Paul from a Liberal Perspective and As a Republican Candidate for 2012

“An open look at the Democrats’ chances in 2012, but concentrating on the possible Republican nominees and evaluating the chances of Libertarian standard bearer Ron Paul and his son Rand Paul.”

By Paul Evans

He's been right about the economy, Banksters, Wall St., the Fed, the wars, the bail outs. There's your change. The GOP and the Dems just serve their political contributors.

Could the 75 Year Old Libertarian Party Standard Bearer Emerge as the GOP Nominee?

Evans Liberal Politics, August 30, 2010, by Paul Evans:

The Prospects for a Democratic Win in 2012

The Tea Party enjoys a 25 or 26 percent popularity in America and 80 percent of them identify as belonging to the Republican Party. “Out of 50 states, just 3 candidates won while claiming to be Tea Party members Rand Paul in Kentucky and Sharron Angle in Nevada (both running for Congress) and Nikki Haley of South Carolina (running for governor).” Of course, the Republican Party is now pretty much a regionalized, Southern and Western concern, with only 25 percent of the population having a “very positive” or “somewhat positive” view of the GOP. This is actually lower than for Dick Cheney, who comes in at 26 percent popularity. Still, 2008 was closer than that, the GOP is now backed by Wall Street and big corporation dollars, and there are plenty of on-the-line, Reagan Democrat and Independent voters who swing Republican at times. Only 32 percent of Independents want the Democrats to keep control of Congress in the Fall elections, whereas Obama took 52 percent of the Independent vote in 2008. This is a very worrisome trend for Democrats.

Much has been made of a looming “enthusiasm gap,” with conservative Republicans much more enthusiastic about voting this fall (51 percent of conservative Republicans are enthusiastic) versus just 29 percent of liberal Democrats describing themselves as enthusiastic to vote. 9 out of 10 Independents cite the economy as the main reason they now are against Democrats as prospective voters, and the economy is not cooperating, probably headed for the second dip of a double dip Great Recession (or Depression, according to some), just in time for this fall’s elections.

It’s hard to say the kind of shape the economy will be in by November, 2012. But with the prospect of a gridlocked Congress after this fall’s elections, it’s unlikely that anything really positive will get done afterword that Obama can point to in an election campaign. Obama has had his two year opportunity and has shaped some important reforms (health care, Wall Street reform, the stimulus), yet the conservative media has done an excellent job painting the picture of a somewhat unsuccessful legislative accomplishment, despite this. The nomination of a very conservative candidate like Sarah Palin is Obama’s best hope for an easy reelection, with a lot of anger about how bad things are permeating the nation.

The Republican Presidential Field for 2012

A Frank Look at the Republican Field of Potential Candidates

According to MSNBC, Palin currently enjoys a leading popularity among potential Republican nominees, with a 76 percent approval rating among GOP Party members. The next nearest personality, Arkansas’ Mike Huckabee, is at a 65 percent popularity. Mitt Romney, who came close to getting the nomination in 2008, and is an establishment insider who is somewhat handicapped by the fact that he is a Mormon. Romney is still popular and might even be considered the front-runner at this point, and there has been a lot of talk and machinations from Newt Gingrich, who has a certain following. But what about that “other” Republican, Libertarian Party leader Dr. Ron Paul?

Many liberals frankly just don’t have enough information to properly assess Dr. Paul. We know that he is anti-corporatist, which we like a lot, and that he pretty much advocates a return to a gold standard, and that he is very much against corruption in the Federal Reserve, and works with committed liberals like Alan Grayson in such matters. Describing Obama himself as something of a corporatist, which progressives find sadly all too true, Paul debunked the right wing myth of the President as a socialist back at the end of April. Dr. Paul is an retired obstetrician/gynecologist, and thus an educated man who has some subtlety to his vision of the world, unlike Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee.

He also has a certain reputation, and there is a certain amount of evidence for this, to the effect that he has made a number of statements evidencing a certain prejudice towards African-Americans. Dr. Paul answered those charges in a CNN News video. Apparently the charges originated mainly from some 10 to 15 year old semiofficial Libertarian newsletters with some prejudiced comments that had Paul’s name on them, but apparently he did not write the comments, and we ourselves do not feel that Dr. Paul is at all racist. I think it was a bit of a witch hunt, as Paul says. Dr. Paul certainly advocates non-violent protest in the same vein as, and very much supporting, the efforts of Dr. Martin Luther King and Gandhi.

A very positive video, put out by America Restored, with footage of C-SPAN video of Dr. Paul’s speeches and material from MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, from April 6, 2009, contains a concise statement of some of Ron Paul’s Constitutional and governmental views. It has a title to the effect that Ron Paul does not plan to run for President in 2012. The video ends with a statement that the reason people like Dr. Paul so much in the countryside is that his love for America is foremost in his mind, more than his personal ambition — a rare quality among politicians. The problem we liberals have with Dr. Paul, besides his appalling wish to return us to a gold standard, is that he is so anti-government in his strict constructionist Constitutional interpretation, and that this leads to his strong emphasis on small government, which liberals find to be not too practical in today’s society.

Dr. Paul is certainly against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, challenging the whole GOP foreign policy agenda. Paul has made some strong statements against the bloated intelligence community which appeal to liberals like me. He also would pardon all nonviolent drug offenders, which he feels is strongly racist towards blacks, since 14 percent of of blacks in the cities end up in prison for drug crimes.

So Ron Paul is not the devil to some of us liberals, as are Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck is self-evidently a charlatan, without any experience at working in the news field, yet very popular among a certain segment of the Republican base. Sarah Palin’s homey, aw shucks folks, gee I’ll have to get back with you on that interviews still apparently fly with this base — evidence the 76 percent popularity rating among Republicans mentioned above — and she has to be considered the leading politician in the field of potential Republican candidates for 2012. Sadly.

Rand Paul, Dr. Paul’s 47 year old son, is the GOP candidate from Kentucky for United States Senator for 2010, and Kentucky has to be considered a Republican state. He was actively opposed by Mitch McConnell in the primaries. Rand Paul got into a little trouble for a stand he took about the 1964 Civil Rights act, which Politico correctly described as a stand (against the Civil Rights act) narrowly based on his own Libertarian Constitutional principles rather than any real prejudice. Other thoughtful liberal sources concur that Rand Paul is really far more adamantly free market and against limitations placed on business by one small portion of the 1964 Civil Rights act than he is in any way unusually prejudiced or any more racist than most successful whites (let’s face it).

He has in fact been mentioned as a potential Republican nominee for 2012, getting some attention at Salon.com as a potential nominee. A Rand Paul candidacy is not altogether improbable either. As Salon says:

“on the surface this is a silly idea. The 47-year-old Paul has no previous experience in government or politics and will, in ’12, have been a senator for just two years. Plus, given the realities of modern presidential politicking, he’d essentially need to begin campaigning a few months into his freshman term.

But when you look closer, it starts to make sense, for two basic reasons: 1) The political atmosphere has never been more favorable for Ron Paul’s brand of libertarianism; and 2) Ron Paul himself will be 77 years old in 2012. In other words, the old man may not feel like spending another two years of his life running around the country, but with a son in the Senate, he’d have someone to pass the torch to.

In 2008, Ron Paul managed to mount a surprisingly credible campaign, raising astounding sums of money and nabbing around 10 percent in Iowa and New Hampshire. He never seriously threatened to win the nomination, though, and finished with only a handful of delegates, despite staying in the race until the bitter end.

This was all in the, pre-Wall Street collapse, pre-TARP, pre-President Obama Republican Party. In the last two years, Ron Paul’s message has found wider resonance in the GOP, fueled by deep grass-roots anger at Washington and Wall Street — enough that he was able to win February’s CPAC straw poll.

There is a very interesting article in August 23rd’s Washington Post about a rift between the senior Ron Paul and son Rand Paul regarding the building of the so-called ground zero mosque. Apparently Ron Paul supports building the mosque, and in a statement released August 20th, ripped into opponents of the mosque, charging political demagoguery. However Rand Paul, probably hoping to capitalize on the prevailing public opinion (and following the Republican Party line) is very much against the mosque. To which Ron Paul’s reaction was (via a spokesman), as reported by Talking Points Memo, “Rand Paul is his own man.” If this is any indication, Rand Paul has a way to go before he becomes half the man his father is, philosophically and politically.

Along with Sarah Palin’s resurgence in popularity among the GOP base, it is well to remember that Ron Paul is still very popular, and is the leading figure in Libertarian circles, and in fact, most people in Libertarian circles usually end up voting Republican anyway. Let’s fact it folks, the political system in the United States is currently locked up in a two party system. Whether Dr. Paul’s son Rand Paul can emerge as a legitimate Presidential candidate by 2012, only time will tell. But there is in fact little doubt that he will be the next Republican Senator from Kentucky, and there is a lot of time between now and 2012.

And let’s admit it, Mike Huckabee ain’t going to get the nomination. He’s too much the outsider, and while he is a fine Christian man, he’s said some pretty terrible or ignorant things that don’t fly with the average educated American. (Of course, we thought Sarah Palin wouldn’t fly with even the average educated Republican voter. Apparently we were wrong there.) For instance, by and large Americans still support Medicare and Medicaid, the essential social safety nets poorer and older Americans rely on. Huckabee is against Medicaid, saying, “One thing governors feel, Democrats and Republicans alike, is that we have a health care system that, if you’re on Medicaid, you have unlimited access to health care, at unlimited levels, at no cost. No wonder it’s running away.” Yes, Mr. Huckabee? Medicaid gives “unlimited access?” Try finding a decent doctor who accepts it outside of the inner cities. And don’t you realize, sir, that, while it certainly IS a drain on state budgets, it provides absolutely essential health care services to many millions of Americans who would otherwise suffer and even die without it. And you want to cut THAT out of the equation?

And let’s face it, a guy with the humble roots and “outsider” status Huckabee has just isn’t going to make it on the national political stage. He’s said some revealing things that show us that he is really kind of “out of it,” like: “When we were in college we used to take a popcorn popper — because that was the only thing they would let us have in the dorms — and fry squirrels in the popcorn popper.” (Sorry if that might make me seem elitist, believe me I’m not and I actually appreciate the humor of it, but, really, that’s not a “Presidential” quotation.) And people generally get that a guy like Huckabee isn’t our man to run foreign policy for the United States. Take a quote like: “And the ultimate thing is, I may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.” No, take Mike Huckabee out of the equation. The libertarian block inside of the GOP largely doesn’t support Huckabee, and he is too much the uneducated outsider.

The real fight for the 2012 Republican nomination might come down to a fight between Sarah Palin (with Glenn Beck on the ticket for VP?), Mitt Romney as the business community and establishment insider, and the Libertarian Party patriarch Ron Paul’s son Rand Paul. Certainly Dr. Paul himself has a LOT of popularity on the internet. We’ll give you more coverage on Rand Paul at a later date, especially if he emerges as the Libertarian Party’s — or that component of the GOP’s standard bearer.

Take Newt Gingrich out of the equation. There’s been some speculation to the effect that Newt’s self-promoting crusades against homosexuality and against the Ground Zero mosque, which have given him a resurgence in popularity and some mention as a potential candidate for 2012, have really been all about selling his books. The comparison he made between Moslim moderates wanting to build a mosque near ground zero and the Nazi’s who slaughtered 6 million Jews at the time of WWII is outside of the mainstream of American politics. While currently 66 percent of Americans are against building the mosque, and because of that Gingrich was able to insert himself into the limelight, it’s not the kind of statement that endears itself to the Israeli lobby, or most educated Americans, and Gingrich already had his chance.

My own comment about Gingrich’s grandstanding on August 23rd was:

“Newt, I never thought very highly of you, but how low you’ve sunk! According to my friend Linda, the concensus on MSNBC’s Morning Joe is that Newt is mainly out to turn a buck selling his books and this is publicity. There was discussion that (of course) he has been prominently mentioned as a Republican Presidential candidate, but if (he) were doing that, he’s alienating too many Reagan Democrats, Independents and fiscal Republicans with this grandstand act on the ground zero mosque. And he just finished a similar grandstand act on “family values” and homosexuality back at the beginning of August. No, Mr. Gingrich apparently is just shamelessly trying to make a buck. And think of the forces he has loosed in America, he and his cohort in bigotry Sarah Palin! Freakin’ idiots!” ~ Paul Evans

America deserves better than the likes of the sickening pairing off of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. (Since the two of them are so chummy these days, the frightening prospect of Glenn Beck as a Vice Presidential candidate on a ticket with Sarah Palin rears it’s ugly head.) As to Newt Gingrich, he has the albatross of his two divorces and unfaithfulness to his wives around his neck, and as to his recent comments (and his renewed popularity), while comments like those appeal to certain segments of the population, they are outside of the mainstream of politics and will not fly for 2012. At least one can hope comments like those are still too unclassy, and basically Newt has been considered as washed up for some time, despite his recent popularity.

This leaves whomever takes up Ron Paul’s Libertarian banner, the Sarah Palin juggernaut, and Mitt Romney, who edged out Dr. Paul in a Republican straw poll of GOP insiders, 439 to 438, in early April. (Sarah Palin came in third with 321 votes). Romney is popular in the business community, but I’m really not sure if America is ready for a Mormon President.

The Washington Post’s coverage on the Republican field for 2012 gives some prominent coverage for Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who is already to some extent campaigning actively for the slot. We feel that he is too much of an unknown, although he has certainly been trying to get into the picture, and certainly Barack Obama was not a household name at the beginning of 2007, either. But Pawlenty is not as popular as other Republican personalities and is even more unlikely at this point to get close to the nomination than would be the Libertarian standard bearer, whoever that turns out to be. The Post feels that at this point Romney has to be considered the front runner. I think he’s be a shoe in if not for the fact that he is Mormon. Mormons are fine people, but knowing the nature of religious prejudice as I do (that whole Book of Mormon thing doesn’t fly with a lot of conservative Christians), I really still think America isn’t ready for a Mormon President, however much influence that church admittedly has in Washington power circles, (and that actually is not inconsiderable). Still, Obama overcame his blackness, an Islamic middle name, and being a relative unknown, didn’t he? Yet, in 2012, more than in 2008, Romney may suffer from a reputation as a Washington insider and as a business and Wall Street sort of insider among a Republican base really pretty fed up with “business as usual.”

The other figure mentioned as early as April 26th as a legitimate candidate is Haley Barbour, Governor of Mississippi. Certainly the case could be made for a Barbour candidacy, although he is little known outside of the South. “If there is anything to think about after the election is over, then I’ll start to think about it then,” Barbour said in a classic bit of leaving-the-door-ajar-ism. “If you see me lose 40 pounds, you will see I am either running or have cancer.” Barbour has to be considered, considering what a regionalized, Southern-based party the GOP has become.

Would the Republican Party really nominate a woman they knew was likely to lose against Obama in 2012? Or would a business insider like Romney be more likely? Certainly, if a black man can now get elected President, perhaps the time has come when a Mormon could. But don’t count out whomever emerges as the Libertarian standard bearer, whether it is Rand Paul or someone else. America is tired of “insiders” and the Washington political elite, and from what I’ve seen, the mood is pretty ugly here in the countryside. To a liberal like me, I wouldn’t want to see a know-nothing like Sarah Palin get anywhere near the nomination of one of the two major parties in a Presidential election. I’m too much of a patriot to want to see somebody who can’t answer questions from news commentators get that close to the position of President.

As a Democrat, I know that a Palin nomination would make a second term for Barack Obama very likely, but I don’t want to see a false, ignorant, self-serving charlatan like Palin that near to the Presidency. Far better that someone like Dr. Ron Paul, who would at least get us out of Afghanistan and is against the Wall Street establishment, attain the GOP nomination than Sarah Palin, who really scares me. Romney is a slick business community right wing insider I would hate to see get the nomination as well, especially since a Romney nomination would play better with Reagan Democrats and Independents than would a Palin candidacy. I have to admit to a certain personal liking for Ron Paul, although I can’t support many of his ideas about a return to a Gold Standard and reducing government. He’s a likable, and educated man, and I have to think that he, at least, would work towards cleaning some of the corruption out of the political process. They say that at 75 (77 in 2012), Ron Paul is too old to run for President, but his mind is certainly sharp, and time will tell. We could do worse. A lot.

Watch Why (good) libertarians and socialists/progressives aren’t really at odds with each other, YouTube video — 6:38.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Ron-Paul-from-a-Liberal-Pe-by-Paul-Evans-100829-32.html