Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Republicans really need to make peace with Ron Paul (and his followers)

Bill Kristol is insane for suggesting Ron Paul should leave the GOP.  
Get ready to make a deal...
I disagree with a lot that Ron Paul promotes.  I have significant problems with some of the people who Ron Paul seems to attract.  But a lot of what Ron Paul promotes is legitimate.   
As Senator Jim DeMint noted on Laura Ingraham's show when asked about Ron Paul:
I’m glad you asked about that because I think one of the things that have hurt the so-called conservative alternative is saying derogatory things about Ron Paul. I don’t agree with him on everything, but he is right about the out-of-control and unaccountable Federal Reserve. He’s right about the need for limited constitutional government and the importance of individual liberty. And I really think the Republican ... is going to win this thing — if they capture some of what Ron Paul’s [been] talking about for years. And more and more we can see that what he's been talking about is true.
Michael Tanner at NRO is right.  We have a big election coming up that will probably be close.  Do we really want to encourage Ron Paul to run as a third party candidate or endorse some other third party candidate?  Does what Bill Kristol is suggesting benefit the GOP?  You do not have to adopt every position Ron Paul holds.  Some would be unacceptable.  But other Ron Paul positions (such as fiscal restraint) should be central tenants for conservatives.  Perhaps a GOP that adopts a more overtly fiscally conservative posture and supports protecting individual civil liberties and freedoms would be a better GOP that would attract more voters (and actually does a better job governing)?   Shouldn't the GOP promote smaller, leaner, and limited government?  Isn't that what Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan fought for?  
Prior Post:    Sarah Palin:  The GOP should not marginalize Ron Paul supporters.

Update:  Elections matter.  Especially the White House.  Do we really want Barack Obama picking the next Supreme Court vacancy?  

Update II:  Right now, does Obama win?
Update III: William F. Buckley Jr. interviewing Ron Paul


  1. You know, dropping by on a blog like yours - I mean, I can relate to the fact that we both have opinions on things that a lot of people (prolly different people in each case!) would call crazy. And at the same time, we realize the need to contend with different points of view. And this is what makes me realize that, with this entry of yours, I envy about you. Not only do you get this fact, you get to apply to it to a party that has so much more to work with. The number of interest groups in the GOP are many and (often) practical and diverse, and holding them together will be the main challenge. Whereas I have to contend with the sad fact that Barack Obama is obsessed with looking so damn focused and pragmatic, while still declaring his across-the-aisle creds, that people wonder whether he's hiding something or just incapable of reaching out to and/or persuading anyone. Now I see why it comes across as disinterested.

    If you guys are able to hold your burgeoning ship together, that would be the ultimate feat and hats off to ya. Unfortunately, I don't know if that could happen as there are just so many interests to reconcile, and their commonalities are diverging. Maybe Obama and his ilk will scrap together something just successful enough to make it by in the meantime, and worry about broader coalition building later. But Paul is the one with the ultimate power in this, as the outsider from the inside, and the only one whose ideological support is growing. It's all his call right now, and how badly one establishment party wants to or can court him is entirely up to him.

    1. That is a very insightful comment Ritmo. In a close race (which this election will be) a guy like Ron Paul can definitely leverage himself (and anyone who can command more than 10% of the vote has leverage). If this results in a GOP making a commitment for fiscal restraint, smaller government, and more freedom/civil liberties, well that is a win-win for everyone. But we will see what Dr. Paul really wants.

    2. This might be matter of trust.

      Even if GOP will commit to fiscal restraints and promise small government and more civil liberties. Can they be trusted to really honor their part of the deal? History of politics teach us, that promises are valid only prior to election, not after.

  2. I've got a better idea. Kristol should go live in North Korea and get his fill of goose-stepping militarism, and Ron Paul should continue to do all he can to make the United States a free country again.


I had to stop Anonymous comments due to spam. But I welcome all legitimate comments. Thanks.