Ron Paul is a Very Dangerous Choice for President

Ron Paul Revolution - photo by Jayel Aheram

I have hinted in the past that I kind of like Ron Paul. I think the biggest reason is because he is not afraid to challenge the GOP establishment. His views on military action and civil liberties are closest to mine compared to any other Republican in office. But make no mistake, Ron Paul would be a terrible President. Some of his libertarian ideas are extremely radical. The article – Paulonomics: Ron Paul’s plans for taxes, spending and Social Security – on Yahoo! News reveals just how extreme these libertarian views are.

The Republican congressman from Texas…wants to abolish five Cabinet departments, drastically lower corporate taxes, and allow younger workers to opt out of the Social Security system.

He wants to cut $1 trillion from the budget in his first year in office and he will do so by decimating the government’s ability to work and serve the people. Eliminate the Education Department? Really? Just fire everyone and let the states handle it I guess? Because it’s always more efficient and promotes equal opportunity to have 50 different versions of the same thing. Of course I know this argument could be applied to anything that is controlled at a state level and not the federal level but the Education Department has precedent and there is a very good case to be made that it exists to fulfill the constitutional mandate to ‘promote the general welfare’.

How many federal workers will lose their jobs with Paul’s spending cuts? What effect will it have on a weak economy? How is this not a radical approach to running the country? Some people are so concerned with the idea of too much power concentrated at the federal level that they apparently are willing to start knocking things over and blowing things up in the name of personal liberty.

propose lowering the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, from 35 percent

extend the Bush tax cuts and eliminate the estate tax

supports eliminating the capital gains tax

This is the real class warfare. All of the tax proposals above represent policy catered to a very small amount of very wealthy people. The 99% vs. 1% message is definitely lost on Ron Paul.

Paul would repeal President Obama’s health care law

This is par for the course for GOP candidates. Funny how none of them mention that it would need passage through congress first. I don’t think the health care law went far enough but it’s a good first step. Repealing a law that was intended to help tens of millions more Americans become insured shows both a serious lack of compassion and a complete blindness to the plight of others due to one’s own stringent ideology. But this is libertarianism at its extreme. Selfish.

he would like to allow younger workers to opt out of the Social Security system and the payroll  taxes it imposes

There is a math problem here because current workers are paying for the Social Security and Medicare benefits of retired citizens. Paul addresses this by saying massive cuts in military spending, specifically ending all foreign wars, are to be used to pay for the benefits of those currently enrolled in Social Security and Medicare. The plan to allow younger workers to opt-out will effectively end these benefits as we know them. Both Medicare and Social Security poll at 80% approval or higher. Do you really want to privatize this country’s social safety-net programs so that the 1% can make a profit off them?

Ron Paul seems like a man of integrity and might be a nice guy but he is a dangerous and irresponsible choice for President in a GOP field full of dangerous and irresponsible candidates.

photo by Jayel Aheram via Flickr

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestShare on TumblrDigg thisShare on StumbleUponShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone


#economy#GOP#jobs#libertarian#libertarianism#medicare#president#presidential candidate#Republican#Ron Paul#social security#spending cuts#taxes

  • Steve Schuler

    That’s just the tip of the iceberg! This crackpot is also a creationist and against many women’s health rights (particularly ironic for someone who was practicing as a doctor for years). It’s easy to get caught up in the hype of “kindly old man,” “your ‘hip’ nephew in college loves him,” or “root for the underdog” mentality, but once you actually stop and listen to what he says he wants to happen in America, and think logically/practically about the consequences of these ideas would be, it’s really quite disturbing and would send us backwards, not into the 21st century. …which makes it that much scarier that he’s far from the most extreme GOP candidate running. I would like to think that this extreme right wing group of candidates are good news for Obama’s re-election campaign, when much of the people who originally voted for him have been disappointed in the lack of change they were hoping for, and if there were more mainstream/centrist opponents he might actually have a hard time making a case against them. The current field of extreme right wing nominees pretty much make their own case for voting against them though.

  • Indeed, my article covers just some of the issues pointed out in the Yahoo article. By no means is it a complete list of reasons to why Paul should not be President. I didn’t even tackle the latest Ron Paul story regarding the racist comments in a newsletter he published back in the late 80s and early 90s. Regardless of whether he actually wrote the comments, he still had a responsibility if he was attaching his name to the newsletter.