Skyler the Weird
Countryboy JJ
Rick Barton
Wiley Coyote
BooneCountyGirl
Obama Is No Ron Paul
The Republican presidential nomination process is more than half complete, meaning Ron Paul’s supporters must face a hard fact. Their candidate won’t be the nominee. His delegate count is one-tenth that of Mitt Romney and only Maine has awarded Paul double-digit delegates. Even when Paul wins, he loses.
That’s not to say Rep. Paul is inconsequential; he’s not. But he has as much chance of winning the Republican nomination as do the Pittsburgh Pirates of winning the 2012 World Series. So, where will Paul’s supporters turn in the general election? Believe it or not, the Obama campaign believes it can court alienated Paulites, citing common ground on budget issues and foreign policy.
Whatever the Obama campaign is smoking must be good stuff. Had it been available at Haight-Ashbury, the Summer of Love would’ve lasted a decade. Give the President’s advisors an “A” in spin, but the idea of Paul’s supporters voting Obama is pure fantasy.
Rep. Paul pledged to cut $1 trillion from federal spending immediately upon taking office. He’d like to repeal the 16th Amendment and abolish inheritance and capital gains taxes. Ron Paul might settle for auditing the Federal Reserve, but he’d prefer to eliminate it outright. And voters attracted to these fiscal positions will back Obama’s reelection? Fat chance, Barry!
It’s true that Candidate Obama preached fiscal restraint, criticized Bush’s “unpatriotic” deficit spending, and promised budgetary discipline. His campaign rhetoric left spendthrift Republicans little room to criticize tax-and-spend liberalism. But President Obama is accumulating debt at a rate that makes “W” appear cautious. Three years into Obama’s presidency we’ve increased debt from $10 trillion to $15.5 trillion, give or take a hundred billion. Trillion dollar annual deficits are the new normal. Welfare and food stamp participation has risen, and Washington has seized control of the healthcare industry.
Obama and Paul are as far apart fiscally as the East is from the West. And the notion that Obama’s foreign policies will appeal to Paul’s base is even more far-fetched.
Ron Paul is non-interventionist to the point of being isolationist. On Paul’s ideal plane there would be no appreciable U.S. military presence in the Middle East, Asia, or Europe. And we certainly wouldn’t commit forces to wars that Washington exhibits no apparent interest in winning. For right or wrong, Ron Paul would bring home the troops.
Obama is following the nation-building war strategy he once condemned. Yes, we’ve withdrawn from Iraq, but on a timetable determined before Obama took office. The mission in Afghanistan is muddled, American aircraft are bombing targets inside Pakistan, Libya, and Yemen, and the administration seems content to subvert congressional authority and seek permission from NATO and the UN to intervene in Syria.
In terms of governing philosophy, Barack Obama is to Ron Paul what Karl Marx is to Thomas Jefferson. Only epic absurdity could prompt Obama’s campaign to believe it can woo supporters from a man who is the President’s ideological polar opposite.
We need your help! If you like PunditHouse, please consider donating to us. Even $5 a month can make a difference!
Short URL: http://pundithouse.com/?p=9063
Well, I can definitely agree that Paul supporters won’t be voting for Obama, primarily because we refuse to support big-spending, big-government Progressive liberalism.
Unfortunately for the GOP, President Obama is hardly alone in supporting big-spending, big-government Progressive liberal policies. He has plenty of company on the GOP side of the ticket. Paul supporters, by and large, will not support candidates who espouse policies to grow the size and scope of the Federal government, regardless of the letter next to the name of the candidate putting forth such policies.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
9 
0
“Ron Paul is non-interventionist to the point of being isolationist.”
Y’know, if the two terms meant the same thing there would be no reason to have separate terms.
Why ruin a reasonably good column with such a display of ignorance?
Like or Dislike:
3 
2
You apparently have no earthly idea of delegates are selected…but neither do 95% of your readers. You might all be surprised with Tampa’s results. It might be a good idea to educate yourself before you embarrass yourself with your ignorance.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
apparently in clark co. mo,delegates are chosen after the red-state fascists(gop establishment), call in “law enforcement” to clear the deck;
http://www.dailypaul.com/221773/video-st-louis-tv-on-the-gop-police-riot-which-shut-down-a-missouri-caucus
Like or Dislike:
0 
0