Sunday, January 22, 2012

Why not Ron Paul?

I have to commend Representative Ron Paul on sticking by his principles for decades.  He believes what he believes, and nobody is going to convince him to change his mind.  The problem with that is that I don't agree with him. 
He is a Constitutionalist, but he doesn't interpret it the same way that I do.  He has his set of personal beliefs, and I have mine.  Because of that, we each vary slightly in our interpretations of what we read.  However, these differences are not so great as to convince me that he is unfit for the presidency.  I have studied the Constitution for years.  In less than 3 months, I will be taking an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, even unto the laying down of my life, if need be.  I believe I am entitled to my own opinions on how it was meant to be interpreted.
My biggest issue is that his approach to international affairs are all but guaranteed to doom this country.  Ron Paul seems to be convinced that we, as a country, can just withdraw from the world, focus on ourselves, and be just fine.  I believe that this country was established with the assistance of divine intervention, and that we are not just expected to take care of ourselves.  When we are prosperous, we have a responsibility to help to care for those who cannot care for themselves - this applies to us individually and as a nation.  The Lord has said, "Of him unto whom much is given, much is required" (D&C 82:3).  If our nation is in a position to protect and uplift the oppressed, we damn ourselves if we do not lift a helping hand. 
But this is not all.  Globalization has rendered isolationism impractical and obsolete.  We must maintain international activities and overseas military presence to protect our national interests and our national security.  If Mr. Paul had his way, we would be jeopardizing economic, political and security interests around the world.
Finally, and I intend no offense, I'm just expressing an observation, Ron Paul has the most antagonistic supporters that I have had the displeasure to interact with outside of the United States Democratic Party.  It is inexcusable that they feel they have the right to verbally attack and abuse anyone who doesn't agree with them.  This, unfortunately, has been the majority of my interaction with these people.  What does it say about Mr. Paul that these are the people that he is attracting?  I have no desire to associate myself with a group of people that have such blatant disregard for the opinions that other people have. 
So, why not Ron Paul for president?  I believe I have sufficiently illustrated why not.