Posted on 10/12/2012 6:25:32 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
At a town hall event in Ohio last month, Rep. Paul Ryan was asked why supporters of Ron Paul — the iconoclastic congressman from Texas — should back this year’s Republican ticket.
Appearing offended by the implication, Ryan scolded: “Do you want Barack Obama to be reelected?” Paul is a actually “friend,” he claimed, and the two are in agreement on key issues.
Baloney. Paul is one of only three GOP House members to not endorse Mitt Romney — and there are several reasons for this.
Leave aside that Paul is a man of deep principle, while Romney appears to have never held a sincere belief in his life. More important are their governing visions, which stand in profound conflict.
Paul was moved to run in the 2008 Republican primary largely out of his disgust with President George W. Bush’s foreign policy. You may recall the preemptive invasion of Iraq?
America’s misadventures abroad, Paul posited, have engendered “blowback” (i.e., anti-American resentment) around the world. This, in turn, has put our security at risk.
His rivals for the nomination were predictably outraged by the suggestion. A bitter Rudy Giuliani recently told me that Paul was intent on “blaming America” for the 9/11 attacks.
Those inclined toward Giuliani’s hardline way of thinking constitute the lion’s share of Romney advisers. Liz Cheney takes part in weekly conference calls with the campaign; former Bush officials and consummate warhawks like John Bolton and Dan Senor are major players.
By voting for Romney, then, Paul supporters would be voting for a return to the same neoconservative philosophy that mired us in the Iraq disaster, costing countless lives and dollars.
President Obama may have authorized a drone war and escalated ground troops in Afghanistan, but at least he has avoided launching another full-scale invasion.
This is not a petty distinction. Romney routinely gives assurances that he’d be far more likely to appease Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has designs to attack Iran — perhaps in the coming months. Paul’s passions seem to be most enlivened by his unflinching opposition to aggressive war; for him, this dark prospect would be a nonstarter.
But the unbridgeable divide between Paul and the GOP is not limited to foreign policy.
Many supporters were first attracted to the congressman for his blunt words on the scourge of drug prohibition. Romney has failed to evince an iota of rationality on this front. In May, he was asked for his view on the legality of medical marijuana. “Aren’t there issues of significance you’d like to talk about?” he rebuffed.
Yes, it is true that under Obama, the Drug Enforcement Administration has continued to raid marijuana distribution facilities, while Marines have been deployed overseas on ill-advised drug interdiction missions.
But it’s equally true that Obama has demonstrated some measure of amenability to reform, at least rhetorically. The famously puritanical Romney would likely bring us back to the era of “Just Say No.”
If Paul supporters still believe their aims can be best advanced vis-à-vis the GOP, they are deluding themselves.
Rather than continue this abusive relationship, they must reevaluate — bearing in mind Paul’s track record of fruitful cooperation with the left, most notably Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader. Ron Paul faithful should thus take a cue from the man himself and reject Paul Ryan’s phony entreaties.
In states like New York, where the outcome is essentially predetermined, they should instead vote for a third-party candidate: Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party, Jill Stein of the Green Party, Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party or Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party.
In states that hang in the balance, such as Ohio, Florida or Virginia, they should pinch their noses and vote for President Obama — even if only to punish Romney, Ryan and the GOP.
Tracey is a journalist based in Brooklyn. He contributes to The Nation, The American Conservative, Salon and other publications.
BARF!
anyone who does so hurts Ron Paul
“In states that hang in the balance, such as Ohio, Florida or Virginia, they should pinch their noses and vote for President Obama — even if only to punish Romney, Ryan and the GOP.”
This assclown does not care how the country gets punished.
Why can't they be both?
Who care if the three people who support Paul vote for obama.
Give the insane bastard a sack of dope and a gold coin and let him wander off to happy land.
I’ve seen Paultards here say this
Punish the GOP? Nonsense.
These folks don’t understand this is not about them and their endless grudges. This is about the survival of the nation. They are infantile and self-centered.
Actually, this assclown just reinforces my belief that the most important things in the world to hardcore losertarians is cheap and easily available drugs and the absolute right to stick their c*cks in any orifice they please with the consequences borne by somebody else in either case.
Two things they share in common with BO.
Voting to punish people, or particular politicians, or a movement, is STUPID.
The Harlem paper of record has spoken.
Democrats trying to get republicans to vote for Ron Paul. My aren’t we getting DESPERATE!
“Leave aside that Paul is a man of deep principle,”
Bull ! The guy that ran for congress in the 70s on term limits and is still there in 2012. Principles indeed.
If they can't bring themselves to vote for Romney, then they should "throw their vote away" on Johnson.
This "authors" entire screed is an attempt at fishing for hanging chads...
Agreed.
If they can't bring themselves to vote for Romney, then they should "throw their vote away" on Johnson.
You know, I'm one of those people who cannot vote for Romney, and I'd much rather vote for Johnson (he did a very good job as Governor in New Mexico; actually good enough to get reelected in a then very solidly Democratic State). As it is though, I'm likely to vote for Tom Hoefling [FR's EternalVigilance] or Virgil Goode [I don't think my State will have Libertarian party, but likely will have Constitution].
Anyway, back to point:
Romney is a great candidate for the Republican party, precisely because he talks one way and acts [governs] another... this is just like the Republican party which for any of its major planks does nothing to pursue them [as a party]. (Look at how they treat abortion, or repeal of NFA/GCA, or government accountability [F&F]: absolutely nothing, except [perhaps] kabuki theater.)
“Tracey is a journalist”
Really?
In a pigs eye.
As for EV... "If you can't say anything nice about someone..." No thanks.
“For too long in this society we have celebrated unrestrained individualism over the common community.” ~Joe Biden
“We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society.” ~Hillary Clinton
Paulbots I assume wish to keep property rights, and a stake in how the fruits of their labors are distributed. One final quote that I hope Paul supporters mull over.
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” ~Ayn Rand
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.