“Why not Ron Paul?” That is a question that is asked all over the web by his army of supporters. They argue that he is the only candidate that follows the constitution and is the most honest candidate in the race. Well, the answer to “why not Ron Paul?” is simple: He is a scrawny, less loud-mouthed, and GOP version of Michael Moore. On the Alex Jones radio show Paul said that America is in “great danger” of our government staging a terrorist attack to essentially provide a public diversion from Iraq.
This completely removes any legitimacy he may have had as a GOP candidate for President. I recognize that President Bush is not perfect and things are not well in Iraq, but there is no way the President would ever allow something like that to happen, and for a GOP candidate and congressman to enter the realm of conspiracy theorists with the likes of Moore and Cindy Sheehan makes Paul even more irrelevant than he was before.
In the interview he also added that there is “an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq.” The first mistake Paul made here is using the word “everything,” I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he only used that word because of circumstances, in the same way that many of us use it in debate forums while not actually meaning everything, but most. If he does believe our government blames everything bad in Iraq on Iran, he simply is ignorant and unfit to lead. The Government has said nothing more than that the Iranians are continuing to support many of the insurgents and to have an active presence in Iraqi politics. Now, if there is one thing that I consider myself an expert on, it is Iran. Iran has had the intention since 1979 to spread the Islamic Revolution across the world and now recognizes an exceptional opportunity to expand their influence and revolution in Iraq (and Afghanistan). There is zero objective argument that can be made that Iran is NOT having a huge negative impact on Iraqi security and stability. It seems to me that Ron Paul, because of his personal vitriol for Bush, has allowed emotion and irrationality to cloud his mind and as a result, will simply give Iran a pass because the Bush administration accused them of such actions. Here is betting that if the claims about Iran were first made by, say, a Jim Webb or even a Pelosi and then Bush denied it, Paul would be attacking Bush for NOT confronting the real threat, Iran. This is what happens when people fail to look at a situation as it is and are so wrapped up in frustration and anger at Bush that they begin to believe that such a leader can do nothing right, is in an inherent liar, and thus, everthing he says is wrong no matter how right he may be. This is where Moore, Sheehan, and Pelosi have been for at least the last 4 years and it is now where Ron Paul has gone also.
(Note: I have been planning to write a general column on Ron Paul and why I don’t support him for a while now, I will try to have that out in the next week, depending on other circumstances in the news. Mary, I expect you to read it!)