Diverse groups should support him, because he supports the Constitution.
by James Leroy Wilson
March 22, 2007

Peaceniks have found their Presidential candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

The "get the U.S. out of the U.N" crowd and opponents of the New World Order have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Those who want to reform our drug laws have found candidate who will not just legalize medical marijuana, but all drugs. His name is Ron Paul.

Populists who want to get us out of NAFTA, CAFTA, and the World Trade Organization have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Laissez-faire entrepreneurs have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Pro-lifers have found their candidate, a man who has introduced legislation stripping the federal courts from reviewing abortion cases, effectively overturning Roe v. Wade and returning the question to the states. His name is Ron Paul

Anti-tax libertarians have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Enemies of inflation have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Members of the Religious Right who want to put God back into the schools have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Free speech advocates who oppose all censorship have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Opponents of unlimited immigration and amnesty have found their candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

Civil libertarians who strongly oppose the Patriot Acts, warrant-less spying, the national ID card, torture, and the revocation of habeas corpus have found their Presidential candidate. His name is Ron Paul.

The man with a 100% rating from the Conservative Index also got a 61% "liberal" rating from the National Journal – the second highest score for a Republican. He’s not one of those northeastern Republicans either; he’s a Texan. His name is Ron Paul.

One candidate served in the Air Force and, in his real job before and in between stints in Congress, delivered 4000 babies. His name is Ron Paul, M.D.

One candidate who has served in Congress for 18 years is blacked out by the major media, which is not acknowledging his candidacy at all – even so much as to put his name in the polls. His name is Ron Paul.

One would think this "maverick" candidate for the Republican nomination for President must be a man with many contradictions. Based on what you’ve read above, you might think Paul is not "consistent" on the issues. Or maybe he’s an "extremist," whose ideas are so dangerous that the Establishment’s options are to ignore him as best as possible, or kill him.

Is Ron Paul a throwback, a reactionary? Or is he the future? In a way, he’s both.

Paul’s views are similar to those of the American Revolutionaries. And of the Jeffersonian Republicans. They remind one of Andrew Jackson, who abolished the unconstitutional National Bank, but also of the anti-Jacksonian Whigs who opposed Jackson’s dictatorial style. They remind one of Martin van Buren, who kept his hands off the economy and spent his Presidency preventing wars instead of starting them. Of Grover Cleveland and the Bourbon Democrats who opposed imperialism and government hand-outs to Big Business, and supported low tariffs and the Gold Standard. Of the opponents of World War I and Prohibition. Of the anti-New Deal, America First "Old Right." And of some latter-day conservatives tired of high taxes and "legislation from the bench." And, of course, of the modern-day libertarian movement that believes government should be as small as possible and should just leave people alone.

Ron Paul has a reputation in Congress as "Dr. No." If he believes that the Constitution does not authorize a particular law or appropriation, he will vote against it. Often, his is the only "No" vote. When he’s in the White House, expect a record number of vetoes.

The Constitution is the foundation of many of Paul’s beliefs. Paul has a common-sense interpretation of the language and structure of the Constitution. He will enforce what the Constitution says, not what he wishes it to mean. Nor will he ignore it; ignoring the Constitution is the source of most of the problems facing America today, and is also the gateway to tyranny. Most federal criminal laws, particularly our drug laws, are unconstitutional; such restraints on personal behavior are properly and constitutionally left to the states. Most federal programs designed to "help" individuals and communities are also unconstitutional, as are most regulations on business. Paul would cut taxes and spending sharply, reduce America’s prison population of non-violent drug offenders, end corporate welfare and protective tariffs, and deregulate the economy to allow small businesses and entrepreneurs to compete freely.

Paul’s interpretation of the Constitution, which is also mine, sees the federal government as limited by what the Constitution authorizes, and the states virtually unlimited except where the Constitution explicitly puts restrictions and prohibitions on them. Thus, abortion shouldn’t be decided by the federal government one way or the other, because it is out of its Constitutional jurisdiction, but the Constitution doesn’t prohibit states from banning abortion. Whether or not there is prayer in public schools is a question the federal courts shouldn’t interfere with, because the First Amendment only prevents Congress, not the states, from making a law "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." One may not like the laws a state may pass, but that doesn’t mean Congress or the Courts have the authority to overrule such laws. Such abrogation of state power by the federal government is actually the bigger threat; better to have some people suffer under bad state laws than have everyone suffer under bad federal laws.

The Constitution does authorize Congress, and Congress only, to declare war; it doesn’t authorize Congress to delegate or "authorize" the decision to start war in the President. Paul believes the war in Iraq was wrong-headed and unconstitutional from the start, and advocates a timely and safe pull-out of American troops. Paul would also adhere to a policy of "non-interventionism," wherein the United States would not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. Paul would end all forms of foreign aid, opposes the expansion of NATO, and advocates withdrawing America from "entangling alliances" wherein we station tens of thousands of troops in countries like South Korea and Germany that are more than capable of defending themselves.

The Congress does authorize Congress to "raise and support Armies" and to "provide and maintain a Navy;" such powers do not belong to the President, and he has no inherent, extra-Constitutional powers as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy" to revoke habeas corpus, search people and their houses and effects without a warrant, or inflict cruel and inhuman punishments like torture. Paul would restore the Bill of Rights.

The Congress does have the authority to "coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures." It does not have the authority to transfer this authority to an independent bank such as the Federal Reserve. Paul would abolish the Fed and restore the gold standard, that is, define the dollar as a unit of weight in gold. This would mean that gold would our money, with dollar bills as their representation. The money supply would be limited because the gold supply is limited. Monetary inflation will be conquered.

Along with his strong Constitutionalism, Ron Paul is very strong on national sovereignty. By no means a protectionist, he opposes "free trade" agreements and other international treaties and commitments in which Congress cedes authority to supra-national courts and bureaucracies. Americans ought to make laws for Americans. Not an anarchist, he believes the federal government has the right to determine immigration policy and patrol the borders and coasts to guard against illegal immigrants and terrorists, but opposes anti-immigration policies like a national ID card that would undermine the freedom of Americans.

Ron Paul’s views, when one boils them down, reveal moderation and common sense. To ignore the Constitution is to invite tyranny. American troops should protect America, not police the world, and America’s own borders and coasts really should be protected. Taxes should be low and tax policy should be neutral, not favoring some groups over others. Inflation is bad and money should actually be backed by something real and valuable, like gold. Most decisions shouldn’t be made by the federal government, but by states, local communities, and, most of all, individuals.

A successful Ron Paul campaign will go a long way toward correcting America’s course.

Copyright ©2000-2007 partialobserver.com

On The Web: http://partialobserver.com/article.cfm?id=2140