Posted by Brian Bailey on December 21, 2007

Let’s have some fun with politics! Put your prides and prejudices aside for a moment, if you will, and allow me a temporary lack of prudence as I poke and prod presidential politics with some peremptory pejoratives.

---

When discussing Ron Paul’s political positions it is crucial to do some research and to give those positions considerable thought before passing judgment on them.How many candidates can you say this about? How many candidates have policy positions that are complicated enough to require any thought?

Let’s take a quick look at their positions.

Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Thompson
Foreign policy: bomb people
National security: bomb people
Environment: some federal regulation
Education: some federal regulation
Economy: don’t raise federal income taxes

Clinton, Obama, Edwards

Foreign policy: don’t bomb too many people
National security: don’t bomb too many people
Environment: some federal regulation
Education: some federal regulation
Economy: raise federal income taxes

Ron Paul

Foreign policy: don’t bomb anyone
National security: don’t bomb anyone
Environment: no federal regulation
Education: no federal regulation
Economy: no federal income taxes

Just to get it out of the way, let’s all go ahead and make a snap judgment.

In unison, now:

“What!? Ron Paul is crazy!”

Alright, good. Got that out of your system?

Now let’s go ahead and give those positions some thought before passing judgment on them.

First of all, I hope we can all agree that when given the choice between bombing people and not bombing people, it is always best not to bomb them.

Paul wins #1.

For #2 we need only consult our third grade gym teachers- “The best offense is a good defense.”; “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

If your plan for national security involves killing everyone who might try to do you harm before they try to do you harm, then frankly you need to go back to third grade.

In other words, bombing people is not a good national defense. It’s a good national offense, if that’s the sort of thing you like.

Score #2 for Ron Paul and common sense.

#3: No federal regulation of the environment!

But, you say, corporations will pollute and destroy our land!

Yeah, if you let them.

Do you care about the environment? Then do something about it. Get involved, become active. Run for state government, write your legislators. Join the Sierra Club or the Audubon Society. Do what you would do if somebody dumped garbage in your yard- seek legal recourse. Stop sending your money to Washington D.C. where lobbyists, bureaucrats, and professional politicians can divvy it up amongst themselves and their friends.

What’s more, Federal regulations are weak and slow to be implemented. States do a much better job of regulating their own land. In fact, at this very moment the governor of California is preparing to sue the Federal Government because the Feds won’t allow California to enact stricter regulations.Yes, you heard that right. The government of California wants to enact stricter regulations on pollution than the Federal government and the Federal government will not let them. Worse, the Feds put California on hold for TWO YEARS while making their decision.That’s just California, though, right? They have some weird notions in California.Except that 16 other states are trying to enact similar laws and the EPA won’t let them.

It turns out that when we give it some thought we find that Ron Paul isn’t so much advocating no federal regulation as he is advocating strong state regulations. It follows logically that if state governments are trying to pass stricter environmental protections and the federal government is stopping them, Ron Paul actually advocates stricter environmental protections than any other candidate.

Maybe we better give #3 to Ron Paul, too.

Once we’ve thought this through for the environment a minimal amount of research will show us that the same holds true for education. The Federal government has made a complete mess of our education system. Ask any teachers or school administrators about their thoughts on the subject.

This is why so many of the presidential candidates spend a great deal of time addressing our public school teachers. If you’ve listened to any of their stump speeches you know that they all try to convince the teachers that they have the best plan for fixing our system.

Translated: every candidate agrees with Ron Paul that federal oversight of our education system has not worked. However, Ron Paul is the only candidate wise enough to know that he cannot and should not try to fix every problem facing this country.

Rather than trying to add ever more complex and federal regulations to this system, perhaps we should try letting the people who know and care about the problems to fix them. That would be you, your friends, your family, and, yes… the teachers.

Can we agree that perhaps teachers and the parents of students care and know more about these problems than politicians in Washington?

Can we agree that maybe, just maybe, Ron Paul has a pretty good plan for #4?

Ok, good.

Now #5: no federal taxes. At all. Period. Exclamation mark.

How is that even possible? That’s crazy, right?

Except that it isn’t.

It’s one of the sanest things ever said.

It’s like being a psychiatrist and going into an insane asylum, walking up to a schizophrenic, and calmly telling him the cause of his dementia.

You’re right, you know you’re right, and every other sane person knows you’re right.

Unfortunately the schizophrenic feels safe in the asylum and he can’t understand what you’re saying.

The simple sane fact of the matter is that if you cut spending you can cut taxes.

Bombs are expensive. Federal regulations are expensive.

Stop bombing and regulating people so much and you can abolish federal taxes.

There is nothing complicated about this, and there is certainly nothing crazy about it.

Conclusion:

It’s easy to make snap judgments about the policies of most candidates because they have snap policies.

When the policies are more thoughtful and considered our judgments must be equally thoughtful and considered.

When you think about it, it seems that maybe Ron Paul is not so crazy after all.