The Ron Paul Revolution

What’s up with Ron Paul? The grandfatherly OB/GYN doctor and libertarian Republican has always generated controversy and has been a genuine thorn-in-the-side of congressional Republican leaders for years. But his quixotic Presidential bid seems to be gaining some traction, at least on the financial front. Paul is raising serious money on the Internet, and is raising it almost exclusively in small donations. His followers are unique in their devotion. A recent CNN/Political Ticker story about his raising $4.2 million on Guy Fawkes Day was followed by dozens of comments from his supporters, praising him in almost Messianic language. There are frequent and passionate letters endorsing him on Utah’s editorial pages.

What’s behind the passion? As one who disagrees with many of his positions on the issues, I have to admit that I really admire the guy. It seems clear that he is one of the few truly anti-establishment Presidential candidates (Dennis Kucinich is another) who are speaking out with Truman-esque clarity about where current government policies of special-interest patronage, borrow-and-spend promises, over-extension of our military and erosion of our liberties are taking us. His conservatism is a different brand than what I call Tom DeLay Conservatism, where the term “limited government” really means “I want the government to limit you but give all the power to me”. Tom De Lay Conservatism has resulted in a bloated and intrusive government, ever increasing government spending, massive national and private debt, and an inexorable transfer of the nation’s wealth from middle class Americans to the super rich.

As I’ve written before on these pages, I’m not personally a big fan of governing by ideology. In my view, pragmatism dictates that some functions in a democratic free market society can be more efficiently provided by public servants, with close oversight by the electorate. In essence, that’s what the voucher debate was about. And my study of the Constitution, the history surrounding its creation, and the Federalist Papers makes clear that the founders meant for the government to have sufficient power to solve problems that would help “promote the general Welfare” (power that is circumscribed by many checks and balances, of course).

Ron Paul and his followers, on the other hand, are definitely ideologues. Having said that, I believe that if we’re choosing between Tom DeLay or Ron Paul conservative ideology, the nation and average middle class Americans would be a lot better off under the Ron Paul version. He’s the real deal: his track record shows he is a tireless defender of limited government and a fighter against wealthy special interests. The man and his followers have an important message.

Like I said, I admire Dr. Paul. I hope the ghosts of Jack and Bobby Kennedy don’t haunt me for saying this, but if he showed up on the ballot in 2008 as an independent (there’s no way the Tom DeLay Conservatives will ever allow him on the Republican ticket), I just might be tempted to vote for him.