If anyone is interested here is an interview with Ron Paul on The News Hour with Jim Lehre.
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ylk69fDO4U
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1l0e5Q2nGA
I'm considering voting for Ron Paul, but I have a lot of questions I'd like answered.
Obviously his stance on Iraq is extremely appealing to me. Last I checked Kucinich had a similar stance, so maybe this explains why I like both of these candidates so much.
I also like his broad idea of non-interventionist foreign policy. I tend to follow foreign affairs the most (primarily military and intelligence issues) and, perhaps unfortunately, domestic affairs not as much as I should. But alas, the foreign affairs issues are the one's that strike closest to my heart so those are the ones I am most keen on. When I was a child I used to sit and draw maps of various countries, and as a teenager/early 20's I was reading journals like Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, books on the CIA and various intelligence agencies, obscure books about the military capabilities of third world countries... all between bong hits and rolling rocks. Had I not done so much partying I'd most likely be working (or would have worked) somewhere like the State Department, Pentagon, NSA or the CIA to be honest.
In my 20's I think I was more of the typical left wing conspiracy theory type of guy. With a bong in my hand I would explain to you how everything was a government plot. But, I always read both sides of the story. I would read a book by William Colby as quickly and openly as I would read one by Phillip Agee. I don't think I would call myself a moderate now, but I do think I built a fairly solid understanding of our countries recent history (with regards to its foreign policy at least) and as a result, as I have gotten older I feel have developed a pretty realistic, pragmatic if you will, understanding of the things our country does abroad, why we do them, and perhaps most importantly how they affect others and us.
I firmly believe that the policies we implement around the world affect others and ultimately us in a negative way and in most cases result in terrible consequences for the people living in the countries we apply these policies to. Ron Paul made a perfect point in the interview I linked to when he mentioned our overthrow of Mohammed Mosadegh of Iran in 1953. I could name a million other examples from pretty much every corner of the globe. Do I believe we should keep our noses out of everything without exception? Not sure to be honest. I do know that 99.9% of the time the reasons why we are told we are doing something are usually not true, there is always a motive, just not what we are told. There really is no such thing as a humanitarian military intervention, to be honest the only one that comes to my mind would be Vietnams invasion of Cambodia in 1979, kicking the Khmer Rouge regime (another sad by-product of American interventionism) from Phnom Penh.
So yes, I strongly support a non-interventionist foreign policy and this, along with Iraq, is one of the things that really turns me on to Ron Paul. I think it might do us some good for a while. It would be interesting to see what levels of anti-Americanism we would see if we say... pulled all of our troops out of the middle east and stopped supporting corrupt Kings and Dictators just because it is supposedly in our "interests". If we *gasp* ceased our blatantly one sided support of Israel? Israel is armed to the teeth, fully nuclear, and have one of the most effective intelligence capabilities in the world - they are more than capable of taking care of themselves.
Also, I am really beginning to like the idea of smaller government, mostly perhaps because I am very afraid of the direction our current one has been heading. I would say I am pro-abortion but mainly because I do not believe it is the right of the Federal Government to decide. So I would be open to this issue being determined by the states. Same goes for prayer in schools, I am against it, but do not believe it is an issue that should be determined by the Federal government. I've really begun to feel that Government is most effective, and most responsive, on a local level. So perhaps this is also a reason why Ron Paul is very appealing to me at the moment.
And, as silly as it may sound, I really believe he is an honest man who speaks from the heart. That may change, but right now that is how I feel. I mentioned that I also like Kucinich, but the last interview I watched with him I could not help but pick up a bit of "washington" in his answers. I don't know...
But I have my questions and skepticism as well.
For one, I disagree with his assertion that the CIA is an invisible government. The CIA is beholden to the executive, and in matters of foreign policy it is actually the job of the CIA to deflect responsibility from the executive and onto itself. They are given orders by the president and the NSC and are also supposed to take the hit if things go wrong. It's actually written into their charter I believe.
Ron Paul does not call for abolishing the CIA, which I would be opposed to, but calls for abolishing many of its functions. I want to know more about what he plans. I'm pro-peace and anti-intervention, but I do not for a second believe we should be without an effective military and intelligence gathering apparatus. I would agree with a scaled back Directorate of Operations focused primarily on Intelligence gathering and not at all on things like destabilization, kidnappings, assassinations and coup's.
Also, I am all for smaller government, but who is going to keep an eye on big business? I also firmly believe that the policies of big business has been a plague on the democratic system and on the people. They simply wield way too much influence and power. What does Ron Paul propose to do to fix this? What does Ron Paul propose to do to make sure workers rights are protected? A few years ago a large company in my area called Bethlehem Steel was bought out by a company called ISG. ISG somehow managed to buy Beth Steel without any of it's "liabilities" - everybody was happy, except the people who worked there. Thousands of people in my area were affected. My Father in law was one of them, 28 1/2 years on the job, 18 months away from retirement and he lost his pension. Well, he didn't completely lose it, but he now has to work another 10 years in that shit hole and will retire on a pension that is 1/3 of what he was promised.
He was crushed.
I want to know how we can make sure things like this do not happen anymore, and how a smaller government would ensure the people were protected from shady business practices such as the Beth Steel/ISG deal.
I think one of the most important issues threatening our Democracy is media consolidation (that Bill Clinton made possible with the Telecommunications act of 1996). This needs to be rolled back, and I know Kucinich has proposed legislation to do so, but what about Ron Paul? What is his solution?
What about campaign contributions from PACS, big business and special interest groups? Money - perhaps one of the most corrupting things in government. How will a smaller government keep big business out of government?
Exactly how will smaller Government make sure big business does not run amok?
Where does he stand on the environment?
I really am all for a smaller federal government, with many important decisions being made locally the only way this will truly be effective, the only way the peoples voices will really be heard, is to get big money/big business out of government completely.
Also, what about civil rights? A lot of the mess we had back during the civil rights movement was a result of racist local authorities. School segregation, etc. Not saying racism didn't (and still does not) exist in the Federal Government, but it wasn't until the Federal government got involved that things began to change. Would Local and State governments in Mississippi have allowed things like desegregation with out Federal intervention?
It may not be quite as blatant, but racism is still alive and well here. How will a hands off Federal government protect individual liberties if localities are free to ignore them because the Feds are "hands off"
So, I'm not criticizing him or his ideas, those are just some of the questions I want answered myself before I will commit my vote to Ron Paul. That said, right now he really does have my ear.
