Wednesday, March 19, 2008

He doesn't have practical answers...

I was talking to a friend the other day on a short road trip, and the conversation turned to politics. Trying to stay within the bounds of propriety (i.e. not shouting Ron Paul is the only valid candidate), I merely asked what he thought of Ron Paul's fiscal ideas.

His response was troubling to me. "He doesn't have practical answers. He doesn't seem to know what he's talking about", was a close paraphrase of his reply.

I have to heartily disagree with my friend in this issue. As posted before, politics will not save us. But since we are currently in the paradigm of being able to choose our leadership, I hope that all Christians will thoughtfully and prayerfully choose their government. I'll try to post a few links and ideas to help in the "thoughtfully" part of this equation.

Could any of the presidential candidates from this year answer any of these questions (shown below in video form on YouTube) from Ron Paul without purposefully re-directing the question to "Dr. Paul, does your candidacy even have ANY legitimacy?" or "Did you know that supports your candidacy?" or "Why do you hate the 9/11 victims so much?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVCStbbIvDg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8pLpI5rzKI&feature=related


The candidates for president in this election have all been thrown softball questions. None of them have shown substance with integrity that is beyond reproach...except for Dr. Paul.

Obviously, he will not win the election this year, but the ideas to which he holds true have been planted, and when future candidates seek your vote, look for these constitutional ideals.



UPDATE: Ron Paul knows economics. He understands the relatedness of economics to foreign and domestic policies. However, he is not a celebrity like Hillary Clinton, who does not even being to understand economic policy.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

economics is pretty simple really; the government should only be involved enough to prosecute the cheaters and robbers (whether white collar of literal). somebody has to pay for services, and the governement has no money except what it takes from us or prints.
if banks made bad loans, they should suffer the consequence. If a person bought a house they can't afford, they should be foreclosed, not babied with government(your) bail out funds.

all the other words are just double speak - we should pay as we go. If i want better highways or libraries, i ought to be willing to pay tolls. but don't pay a cotton farmer for letting his field lay idle, or a milk producer for pouring milk down the drain.