NEWS TALK RADIO Our Hosts
Powered by: Townhall.com
Sign Up
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
Ron Paul Looks Ahead of Convention
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you think the President's plan to freeze interest rates on some sub prime mortgages will be successful?

Congressman Ron Paul ruled out the possibility of running as a third party candidate in the 2008 election and said he expected support for his candidacy at the Republican National Convention at a private event to discuss his new book Wednesday afternoon.

“Theoretically, I could run as an Independent or third party, but realistically I have no plans to do that,” Paul told a small audience of conservatives in Washington.

The Texas congressman said a Washington rally was being planned for July 12 and “we will probably have a good gathering in Minneapolis.”

Although John McCain has practically secured the Republican nomination for president, Paul’s supporters have continued enthusiastically supporting Paul. Last March Paul released a web video to say his campaign was “winding down,” but Paul has never officially dropped out of the race.

Paul acknowledged his presidential prospects were grim. After the convention, Paul said he will have to have “a precise program that we will come up with later." Paul noted he has had an educational foundation, The Foundation for Rational Economics and Freedom (FREE), since 1976 and said “long-term education is more important than policy.”

“We will use that to continue,” he said.

At the event, hosted by the American Conservative Defense Alliance, Paul discussed his new book, a best seller on Amazon.com titled “The Revolution: A Manifesto.” The book distills his policy ideas that inspired a massive, grassroots movement behind his presidential campaign.

During the question and answer session Paul scolded his fellow conservative Republicans for not being consistent in their principles. “Too many members are not confident enough to feel strongly enough to stick to the Constitution,” he lamented. He singled out those in particular who seemed to enjoy criticizing the Clinton Administration for nation-building, but refrained from doing the same to President Bush.

“Sometimes I joke that the Americans have short memories and the Arabs and the Muslims never forget anything,” he said.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is National Political Reporter for Townhall.com.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: Response
Lestat said


**************************

And I'm sick of the lie that Paul is "against earmarks." He gets his own pork inserted into bills, but then he votes against them to keep his charade going. That's more sickening than the pork-lovers who at least take responsibility for it by voting for their own projects.

****************************

While it is true that Ron Paul has passed some earmarks, you seem to forget that he has voted against trillions of dollars in government waste...like the war in Iraq and other expensive foreign policy costs...and he refuses to accept a congressional pension because he doesn't want you the taxpayer to bear the cost of his pension.

Saving the taxpayers trillions of dollars and then asking for a million dollar earmark sounds like a good deal to me.

Ron Paul Looks Ahead of Convention
I voted for Ron Paul in my state's GOP primary (8nforutnately, a token vote, as the unacceptable McCain had clinched it by then) and he has my admiration and respect. However, I think Dr. Paul made a good choice not to run on the Libertarian Party or other third-party/independent ticket (even though I would probably vote for him if he did). One reason for this is that a third-party run by Paul would help negate any positive influence his GOP run may have had. It would enable his enemies to say, "See, he never was a REAL Republican in the first place, and neither are the people who voted for him and supported his ideas."

The other reason is that despite my respect for Dr. Paul, I have to admit he was a flawed candidate and I can't totally blame those who refused to consider voting for him. Some of his ideas are a little extreme or "quirky" even for me, and I consider myself more a libertarian than a conservative. He has not always shown the best judgment, for instance in allowing racist views to be published in his newsletters and in accepting support from neo-Nazi types (though I do not for a second belive Paul is either a racist or a Nazi; in fact, he is the closest thing in American politics to the exact polar opposite of a Nazi). I suspect that if the libertarian/onstitutionalist "revolution" is to get anywhere, it will need a new standard bearer, a winning "Ronald Reagan" to follow up the inspiring but unsuccessful "Barry Goldwater" of Ron Paul. Perhaps the Libertarian Party race will produce that candidate, or maybe he will emerge from the Republicans as that party tries to recover from its impending disaster.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*