Friday, October 12, 2012

Like Ron Paul? Avoid Mitt Romney

By Michael Tracey

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.

Read the rest here.


  1. avoid mitt get obama

    1. So what? There's isn't a dime's difference between them. Statist candidate A vs. statist candidate B. I can't believe there are STILL so many people who can't figure this out.


  2. This guy is spot-on. ABM--Anybody but Mitt!

  3. Like Ron Paul? Avoid Romney, but vote a guy who made the Bush-era abuses look tame by comparison. I can't imagine the kind of cognitive dissonance going on in this guy's head. More of the same recycled "lesser of two evils" bullshit.

    " 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.”"

    Yes, this amenability to reform is exactly why 4 times as many medical marijuana dispensaries have been raided under Obama as Bush.

  4. "they should pinch their noses and vote for President Obama"

    Seriously?? That really takes the cake, now I've heard everything.

  5. wenzel, i'm very surprised that you posted this article. lol, an obama appologist editorial, really?

    this is almost as bad as when ron paul put out the feelers for a romney partnership and then handed the job off to rand when he realized the backlash would ruin him.

    at least post an update with you personal thoughts...

  6. We've got four years of liberalism (Obama) our eight years of liberalism (Romney). Is this really a difficult decision?