Ron Paul gets my vote

Just over two weeks from the PA primary, I am fairly certain I will be casting my vote for president for Pittsburgh-born-and-raised Congressman Ron Paul. Because mainstream media pretty much no longer covers him, some people have never heard of Dr. Paul, and others assume he dropped out of the race months ago. But I am here to tell you that this former libertarian is still fighting the fight, even though it will be an uphill battle. After all, too many people want to know what the government is going to do for them. Ron Paul's vision is not like that. In that respect, he reminds me of Alan Keyes. When he was running for president in '96, Keyes was asked what he would do about the government shutdowns that were going on (maybe it happened just once). He said he planned to do nothing, that he was all for less government and less government spending. I appreciated that stance, but Keyes was a little too conservative for my taste, especially back then.

But now that I have been a working adult for about 15 years, and am someone who lives beneath my means, who does not want the government to take a lot of my money and waste it, and who is tired of too many people looking for a handout or wanting the government to make their (my) decisions, Ron Paul strikes a cord with me. I particularly like that Dr. Paul is opposed to the income tax and would like to see the 16th Amendment repealed (yes, I know that will probably never happen in my lifetime). Paul also signed a no-tax hike pledge, saying he never has and never will vote to raise taxes. If you have read my blog more than a few times, you know how I feel about taxes, so you go, Ron Paul.

Sure, Paul and I are not simpatico in every aspect. But I can say after studying many of the candidates, I am more aligned with Ron Paul than the others. So I think it is time for me, someone who cares about freedom, lower taxes, and less government involvement, to take a stand, go with my gut, and come April 22, vote for Ron Paul. Check out his site if you are interested:


cc said…
I also agree with most of what Ron Paul stands for--just can't get past his belief that if we just leave other countries and stay out of their business, all our enemies will leave us alone and we all will be singing Kum-By-Ya. Naive and dangerous. Not to mention that some of his supporters are obnoxious, but I guess you get that will them all.
Facie :-) said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Facie :-) said…
Sure, no guarantee if you ignore others they will leave you alone, but I am not so sure America as the big bully is helping us so much, and it is more than just the billions we have spent overseas that concerns me.

I am anti-war, but I understood/accepted that we had to go to Afganistan after 9/11. But there was not a compelling reason (at least not one worth the billions of dollars and loss of life) that we should have gone to Iraq. Yes, Saddam was a dictator who was responsible for far more deaths than will come out of the Iraq war (that Bush declared over years ago), but I think we need to worry about home first.
cc said…
I don't know that you should consider us a bully. If we are so bad, why does everyone come running to us in time of need? I believe we can pick and choose what we get involved in a little better, that's for sure but I wouldn't consider us a bully. I am not pro-war per se, but when the need arises there has to be a sacrifice for the greater good. God bless those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.

Not sure we are doing much better trying to take care of our people in America when we do try. Everyone is concerned about the amount of money spent on the war, but we are spending 2x that amount on entitlement programs in this country. They don't seem to be working real well, either.
Facie :-) said…
I asked the (a?) PG executive editor the following today during his chat; his response follows:

traffic: Why hasn't the PG covered hometown Ron Paul more? Sure he is a long shot, but there is no rule saying the delegates have to give their votes to McCain, right? Regardless, when Paul was in the burgh last week, I would have expected a story about it the next day, not just about his visit to IUP. I know the PG is pretty liberal, but come on.

David Shribman: We've been focused, perhaps too much so, on the Democratic race. I find the Paul candidacy very interesting, and the Paul constituency even moreso, so I agree that we could do more.
cc said…
I am a little surprised he let the "liberal" comment go by without saying something, but I am not surprised you don't see much in the Post-Gazette about Mr. Paul. You don't read much at all about John McCain, the Republican nominee, much less anything about Ron Paul.

Popular posts from this blog


My first and hopefully my last biposy (or I would rather be at the beach)

A rambling gun rant