Monday, December 19, 2011

Shrek MMXII?

So it appears Shrek's short reign as the Candidate elect for the Republican nomination (which lasted about a week or so) appears to already be over: Poll. Has there ever been a crazier nomination season than this? This is a reality TV show I could actually consider watching. It's like someone in the GOP is playing a joke on America, throwing one loon after another out and saying "Hey, real Americans, take this!" But the Red States have instead spit every one of them back, leaving Romney and Ron Paul (more below on this loon) standing. Given all of the negative press Gingrich has received from his own party Illuminati -- even Glenn Beck says he can't vote for him and Joe Scarlborough said he is a bad person -- it's not surprising that the people have woken up to the reality. But what madness led them to consider him viable in the first place? Since the primary season began, we have gone through Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt and, of course, the constant rumors that one of the stupidest politicians in history might run (I think her name is Sarah something; I'll have to get back to ya on that one).

In any case, sanity reigns supreme, at least for a moment. But that moment only last as long as we don't pay attention to who now leads. Ron Paul is a substantially more radical character than he plays on television. In fact, he has so bamboozled the press that many liberals actually think he's not that bad. So let's take a look at what the current leader in Iowa stands for ...
  • We should start with his free trade, anti-government, pro-market Australian Business Cycle Theory (see post below). This theory has been discredited by all serious economists and his critique of the 2008 TARP program that probably saved the world economy thus very troubling indeed.
  • He is of course a proponent of small government, lower taxes, deregulation and free markets in general, but at a level far more radical than any serious candidate for the Republican nomination in history. After the financial crisis and growing inequality and poverty, this position would be laughable if the media did their job and the people paid a little attention to the legitimacy of this discourse and who it serves.
  • He believes in non-violent tax resistance (ala Thoreau, though without any critique of slavery or other injustice; just taxes themselves). 
  • He is one of the strongest proponents of the second amendment in politics today (A+ from the NRA)
  • Voted to end affirmative action in college admission arguing racism is a form of "collectivism" that is bad. Well, this might be true, but it still exists and the end of AA has negatively affected minority enrollment, retention and graduation (particularly from top schools).
  • Opposes all efforts for the federal gov't to define marriage but in 2007 did say he would support gay marriage
  • Strong pro-life proponent (which appears to contradict many of his other positions)
  • Argued in 2007 that global warming is not a "major problem threatening civilization"
  • Opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and repeal of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 -- the two signature achievements of the civil rights movement at the federal level. 
  • Wants to restore the practice of Senators being elected by State assemblies and speaks in favor of the electoral college.
  • On a number of points, however, Paul is impressive: he opposed the Iraq War and most foreign military adventures, he believes juries should be able to not only adjudicate cases but consider laws themselves (jury nullification), he voted against the Patriot Act and said he would never break habeas corpus, has come to reject the legitimacy of the death penalty, rejects NCLB (and any federal hand in education), strong proponent of alternative energy (rejects nuclear power, tax subsidies to gas & oil cos., etc.), argues for legalizing drugs and ending the absurd "war on drugs," wants to help healthcare costs and a number of other positive positions.
  • He is thus a principled man, but one whose economic and free trade orthodoxy undermines his more liberal social positions as the country and globe fall further and further into disrepair for the benefit of the few.
So adieu to Gingrich and on to the collapse of Paul to follow. So the girl that no one chooses for the dance looks destined to win the nomination in the end. But can he unseat Obama? Let's hope not ...

No comments: