Also posted at The Collegian.
Tuesday’s Our View in CSU’s The Rocky Mountain Collegian criticized Texas Congressman and GOP candidate for president Dr. Ron Paul. I want to say first and foremost, I welcome any and all factual and nuanced criticisms of the only candidate who isn’t bought and paid for by the banks.
The problem is, it’s virtually impossible for the media to criticize Dr. Paul the way they typically have candidates with whom they disagree or don’t like but they continue to attempt to use the same formula against Dr. Paul.
Instead of boiling down his foreign policy and economic policies to talking points that sound good in front of a debate audience or TV cameras, the Texas Congressman has developed nuanced, complicated and factually supported policies.
Like him or hate him, you cannot boil down his ideas to a few words or talking points.
In the Our View, which was strong on writing and opinion but wanting regarding explanation of complex ideas, the board said the following:
“He also believes that, rather than relying on government restrictions for environmental control, free enterprise is perfectly capable of regulating the environment. Call us crazy, but the BP oil spill pretty much proves how misguided this idea is.”
It takes research and effort beyond what the left or right press opine and report in order to recognize why this claim is completely absurd, but I assure you, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was anything but a failure of the free market.
The free market risks of drilling in areas such as the Deepwater Horizon location were too great for the oil companies to risk due to the liability of oil spills until the lobbies got their claws into Congress after the Exxon-Valdez spill.
My friend, former editor and CSU graduate Ian Bezek covered this very issue in this Collegian column in July 2010. Not only did he adequately explain the market forces at hand that directly contributed to the oil spill, but he did an excellent job demonstrating exactly why Ron Paul is such an asset and is not a kook.
The oil interests, corporations and banks do not WANT the free market Dr. Paul supports. It would kill their golden goose and they would have to rely on effective business strategy and tactics in order to survive and profit.
Our View then made a couple of contextual one-line criticisms of Ron Paul’s philosophies without getting into the nuance. Watch the following video from The Whitest Kids You Know, at the 1:00 minute mark you’ll see exactly the type of tactic that was used in this opinion piece.
“And while Paul claims to be a stringent libertarian, he nevertheless advocates banning abortion and is quoted as saying that gay marriage is absurd.”
Paul doesn’t claim to be a stringent libertarian, he is the embodiment of libertarian ideals. As an OB/GYN he was told very early in his training, when you take over the care of a pregnant woman, you’re responsible for two lives, as a libertarian, he views protection of life as the ultimate responsibility of government.
However, he has stated he does not agree with Congress writing laws governing abortion either way, so he’s advocated the states handle the issue individually. While at the same time he’s introduced a potential Constitutional amendment that would protect fertilized fetuses.
Unlike Sen. Frothy, Rick Santorum’s pro-life policy of keeping us from descending into anarchy for violating God’s will, Ron Paul’s pro-life stance is based on the pragmatisim of protecting existing life.
This wasn’t conveyed in the Our View and it is a significantly complex issue to deserve discussion of the facts, not a butchered attempt at glib criticism in the form of an easily-digested-yet-misleading one-liner.
As far as Dr. Paul stating gay marriage is absurd, try again folks. He’s been consistent and adamant in his view that marriage is not a government issue.
It’s a relationship declaration formed within a religion. If you run a search in Google using “Ron Paul gay marriage is absurd” as the key terms (not with the quotes) the first result to come up is the Our View in question and the rest of the search results don’t exactly support the claim.
What Dr. Paul has repeatedly advocated for those who are concerned on both sides of the issue is to leave it in the hands of the states to decide as the Constitution (Paul is a strict constructionist, meaning if the powers aren’t stated in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution he won’t support it), doesn’t allow Congress to determine personal relationship statuses.
Judge for yourself if that Our View adequately explained Dr. Paul’s stance:
In case that’s not enough evidence of the ludicrous idea Congressman Paul is somehow against gay marriage, further proof of his stance against federal incursion into the arena of marriage is here.
“If elected, Paul promises to eliminate the Federal Reserve, cede most federal power to the states (that would include repealing numerous important federal mandates, including the ones that prohibit segregation in schools) and return to a gold standard.”
Those on both left and right have attempted to frame the subjects of states rights as a descent into total chaos. How it is anyone with any education in modern government can convince themselves that federal laws prohibiting segregation of schools are still necessary is truly beyond my grasp. As if Alabama has the money to build new schools for white students or vice versa.
To claim Dr. Paul advocates simple policies without getting into the subtleties of his positions is disingenuous at best and intentionally misleading at worst. Either way, we’ve seen far too much of it in the mainstream media specifically regarding an honest man who has had the tremendous courage to stand up for what he advocates in the face of tremendous pressure and ridicule.
Who amongst us in the American society would demonstrate the will power Dr. Paul has shown for thirty years in the face of such tremendous political pressure?
The senator from Illinois who now sits in the White House has chastised the monied interests in politics while taking significant contributions from Goldman Sachs and refusing to hold anyone complicit in the financial collapse responsible. This is a man who promised transparency and has carried out the same secret activities as his predecessor.
Ron Paul meanders into town and surprise, surprise, we have two columns critical of excerpts taken out of context from a Congressional member who has seen thru the facade of continuing the cycle of talking point politics.