KenH
Well-Known Member
I don't know who Caleb Johnson is but what a wonderful review of Ron Paul's speech in New Hampshire. Just before this review he reviews Hillary Clinton's appearance in New Hampshire - and he wasn't impressed by her.
I was already somewhat familiar with Texas Congressman Ron Paul before I went to hear him speak at a private reception in Pembroke. I was aware that he had voted against the Patriot Act. Twice. (In both 2001 and 2005.) I was also aware that he had been a leading critic of the war in Iraq. I don't normally give Republicans much of a hearing, but based on what I had heard, Ron Paul deserved a chance. I was in for a pleasant surprise.
Ron Paul 2008 – A Surprising Republican
by Caleb Johnson
by Caleb Johnson
I was already somewhat familiar with Texas Congressman Ron Paul before I went to hear him speak at a private reception in Pembroke. I was aware that he had voted against the Patriot Act. Twice. (In both 2001 and 2005.) I was also aware that he had been a leading critic of the war in Iraq. I don't normally give Republicans much of a hearing, but based on what I had heard, Ron Paul deserved a chance. I was in for a pleasant surprise.
Paul began his speech in a refreshing way, by expressing his own reluctance to run for President. Paul is still in an exploratory phase, not having yet officially declared his candidacy. He spoke frankly about that reluctance to enter the race, explaining that he's not entirely sure he wants the job, but feels that his message is very important. He said that in the coming weeks he would determine whether he thought he could carry that message effectively. I found that attitude refreshing, especially in an age dominated by pompous politicians who feel that they are uniquely qualified to rule over us. Paul doesn't feel uniquely qualified. And he doesn't seem to want to rule over us. His focus is on his message, which is essentially that America needs a new direction. He noted that some people had accused him of not being a “strong leader,” but he rebutted that accusation: “Sometimes being a strong leader means resisting the temptation to use power.” During his time spent in Congress, Paul has consistently resisted the temptation to use power. He is consistently ranked among the highest members of Congress by civil libertarian groups for his commitment to American liberties.
Throughout his speech, he highlighted problems that he believes are indicative of systemic dysfunction within the American political system. He spoke out against Presidential signing statements, which are statements that a President issues when he signs a bill and that modify the legislation. Bush has signed more signing statements than any other President, but Paul was gracious enough not to mention that. Paul also targeted executive orders and regulatory policies which carry the force of law. These are dangerous because they give the executive branch the ability to make laws, concentrating too much power in the Presidency. Paul wants a significant change in direction.
He also focused on economic issues. He spoke out against the dangerous transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy, noting that this frequently precedes a significant economic downturn. He identified the source of the problem as being a government which consistently spends more than it takes in.
Throughout his substantive analysis, Paul was warm and friendly. He was interrupted often by applause, which he handled gracefully. At one point, he told the group, “I love leaving Washington and coming out to speak with the people. I never get applause when I speak in Congress.” The crowd chuckled. If he's making Congress uneasy, that's probably a good sign.
Throughout his speech, Paul was never vindictive. He didn't point a finger of blame at the President or at fellow Congressmen. He resisted any temptation to blame the Democrats for all that ails the nation. Instead, he consistently highlighted the fact that these problems have been going on for a long time. They are systemic failures, not the failures of a single person or a single administrator. In a political climate that rewards divisiveness, this too was refreshing.
He really started to roll when speaking about the War in Iraq. He spoke frankly about his efforts to prevent the War. In committee, he introduced a bill to officially declare War on Iraq. He told his fellow congressman, “We all know that there's no reason to declare war on Iraq, but if you guys want to go to war with Iraq, at least do it right and declare war!” Paul told them that he wouldn't be voting for his own resolution. In fact, no one voted for the resolution, but Paul noted, “They were so mad at me for making them go on the record.” Commenting that some of his Republican colleagues wanted to go to war because Iraq was in technical violation of a UN resolution by firing on American planes that were flying over Iraqi airspace, Paul shook his head and seemed genuinely perplexed. “You're telling me that we're going to bomb a country because somebody shot at a plane and didn't even hit anything?!” This sort of common sense is rare in Congress, and even rarer among Presidential aspirants. On the issue of war in Iraq, Paul's stance was unequivocal: “The troops shouldn't be over there in the first place, and there's no reason they can't come home now.”
Paul concluded his speech by talking about liberty, which he believes is in danger. He spoke about his effort in Congress to protect freedom of speech on the Internet. On this issue, he has walked the walk: In its Technology voter guide, CNET gave him the highest ranking score of any member in the House or Senate for his effort to secure Internet freedom. In his speech, he alerted the group to an attempt in the Senate to censor political speech on the Internet in the days preceding an election. Although this measure was defeated, Paul predicted it will resurface. He reminded those in attendance to beware any time the government declares “war” on something, noting that the war on drugs, poverty, and terrorism have significantly eroded civil liberties.
Paul is not currently the front runner in the Republican field. He isn't even an officially declared candidate. But his speech, like his candidacy, is refreshing. Paul seems to be genuinely authentic. He doesn't have the feel of a politician. His arguments are substantive, and his demeanor warm.
For my part, I hope Paul decides to run. In a weak field, Paul is a true champion. America is at a critical crossroads. Our liberties have been trampled. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are in shambles. Our reputation has been tarnished internationally by decades of provocative foreign policy. Paul is the only candidate thus far who seems interested in reversing that trend. And for that, if he runs, he has my vote.
