Scarborough says he voted for Paul for spending "his entire public career standing athwart history yelling "'stop' to an ever-expanding centralized state," specifically citing his support for a balanced budget, opposition to government interference in the housing market, and dedication to "dismembering" the "big government beast."
Let's analyze each point in turn:
If Ron Paul were given complete dictatorial control over the federal government, not only would he not balance the budget, he would in all likelihood default on our debt. I know in Republicanland tax cuts for the rich are magically revenue neutral, but here in the real world if you abolish the income tax, as Paul wants to do, it would be mathematically impossible to reduce the national debt, much less balance the budget. Even if he literally destroyed the entire federal government, closing down every public school and highway, dropping every senior from the rolls of Medicare and Social Security, and disbanding the entire United States armed forces, he still wouldn't be able to afford the salaries of the only government bureaucrats he seems to like: career politicians like himself.
Additionally, Scarborough says he likes Paul's grand solution to preventing housing bubbles? I assume he's referring to Paul's policy of returning to the gold standard, an action that a poll of forty mainstream economists, liberals and conservatives alike, unanimously agreed would be bad for the average American.
The argument against it is one of pragmatism, not principle. First, a gold standard would have all the disadvantages of any system of rigidly fixed exchange rates--and even economists who are enthusiastic about a common European currency generally think that fixing the European currency to the dollar or yen would be going too far. Second, and crucially, gold is not a stable standard when measured in terms of other goods and services. On the contrary, it is a commodity whose price is constantly buffeted by shifts in supply and demand that have nothing to do with the needs of the world economy--by changes, for example, in dentistry.
The United States abandoned its policy of stabilizing gold prices back in 1971. Since then the price of gold has increased roughly tenfold, while consumer prices have increased about 250 percent. If we had tried to keep the price of gold from rising, this would have required a massive decline in the prices of practically everything else--deflation on a scale not seen since the Depression. This doesn't sound like a particularly good idea.
And his final point, that Paul is this great anti-government crusader. I can't really argue with him there. From wanting to end Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid, to gutting essentially every single regulation ever created, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which he said "undermine[d] the concept of liberty" and "destroyed the principle of private property and private choices," Paul is anything but a big government Republican. We all remember when he infamously declared the government should turn away sick people without health insurance, right? Well, in a sick twist of irony, Paul's own uninsured former campaign manager took his freedom to the grave when he died of pneumonia at age 49, leaving his mother with $400,000 in medical bills. Surely Paul's rank extremism is precisely why conservatives' insistence on the evils of everything government are absurd at best and dishonest at worst. Either they don't understand how disastrous society would be without government regulations, or they are willfully deceiving the public with their absolutist, and often demagogic, rhetoric.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - David Govre
Ron Paul predicted the housing bubble years before it happened and explained why it would happen. I have proof,type in "Ron Paul housing bubble" and bingo you'll find it.
2 - dfgdfg
I like how you use unrelated links to 'support' your misreading of Romney's statements. He is discernable from Obama only in that he ids likes the poor while Obama hates the rich, e.g. his donors. Of course you know that the rich skew towards Obama.
3 - WhenOppStrong
All I say to this article is Ron Paul is still a force to reckon with. That's why there are people attacking him. Something about Ron Paul's fierce supporter base who refuse to back down makes the elite politicians uncomfortable. Romney did not have the delegate count. Whoever believes in him clenching the 1144 do not know the truth. Also there is a federal case filed on behalf of grassroots RP supporters revealing the chilling reality of voter fraud. Who knows how many Romney's votes were flipped! Truth will be exposed.
4 - john hardcock
you americans make me sick i cant believe how you let this farce go on . nobdy wants romney he is crooked piece of crap your only hope was ron paul and istead you let satin get in i hope you get what you deserve !
5 - Richard Wicks
"Elections are about choices"
No they aren't.
Romney and Obama agree on:
* The Patriot Act
* The wars
* Going to war with Iran
* Leaving Gautanamo and other facilities like them open
* "Health Care"
* ending 5th amendment rights with the NDAA
* killing US citizens without charge or trial by assassinating, instead of just having a trial once the government just says "yep, that guy is a terrorist" - you can trust them after all, they wouldn't lie us into a war would they?
* ending 4th amendment rights with the Patriot Act
* bailouts
What exactly is the choice here when they agree on everything?
Oh, I know, Romney and Obama disagree on gay marriage. That's the BIG CHOICE we all have.
After all, elections are about choices, not just a sham to make you think you have a choice. There isn't any important differences between Obama and Romney. Any policy that matters, they are 100% in agreement with.
6 - PaulOrNoneAtAll
"Elections are about choices, and the Republican nominee has already been chosen."
Wow, couldn't have said it better myself... and the fact that you're OK with this makes you the true fool.
7 - James
The author names Joe Scarborough a Fool. AT the same time comment policy does not allow personal attacks. I guess Andrew Casso did not read this policy. He did not read GOP rules, federal laws, and legal precedents that clearly indicate that the delegates are unbound.
8 - Cam
Obama signed into law NDAA which includes indefinite detention of American citizens without a trial. Mitt Romney supports NDAA. Obama and Romney do not believe in due process for the American people. Ron Paul says NDAA is unconstitutional.
9 - TRISH C
Wow another spun out of control article from the MSM - wonder how many other places I will read this uninformed, MSM feed bs?? A person with half a brain + will see what a foley this article is - I am mad because I wasted my time reading it!! Shame on me!! Still holding out eternal hope that I will read something REAL...moving on...
10 - Paulbot
Romney really doesnt have 1144 delegates [personal attack deleted by comments editor]. Did you get that number from the associated press? There are more republicans that want ron paul than want mitt romney.......your vote for romney is a wasted vote.
11 - Garrett Coon
My God, this article is a perfect example of why I switched from being a Poli-Sci major to a Philosophy major, where thorough research and sound argumentation are not just encouraged, they're mandatory.
One need not read beyond the author's horrible misrepresentation of Ron Paul's response to the "should the uninsured be left to die?" question. His answer was "No," but the author takes the response of the ridiculously ignorant audience screaming "YES!" and shoves it into Ron Paul's mouth.
It's a shame that [personal attack deleted by comments editor] individuals as this "author" are those who are passed off as having "expert" opinions. Mitt Romney and Obama are going to keep billions and billions of dollars flowing into basically the same group of people's pockets. They are going to both keep our prisons overflowing with non-violent people. They are both going to ensure that unconstitutional wars continue to be waged oversees. They are both going to keep trying to regulate the internet, our healthcare and virtually every other aspect of our lives.
But, of course, the one man who would actually do the OPPOSITE of all of these atrocious things is to be forever banished to the "far right lunatic fringe."
Mr. Casso, [personal attack deleted by comments editor] rather than bashing that which you clearly do not understand, why not sit down and attempt to do some actual research (I know the word is anathema to Poli-Sci majors), into why Ron Paul was able to predict the housing collapse, or was willing to vote against the Patriot Act, or refuse his government pension, or provide free medical services his impoverished patients?
That's right, the answers wouldn't fit within your shallow, status-quo-centric rhetoric.
Whenever you decide to evolve beyond school-yard name-calling, I highly recommend starting with "Economics in One Lesson" or "The Revolution: A Manifesto." One thing I can guarantee you: you'll actually learn something from those books, unlike the drivel you're apparently being spoon-fed from your professors.
12 - Paulbot
Emory is a small private college in Georgia. That is to say, it is not a MAINSTREAM university. Obviously Andrew attended Emory for reasons that drew him away from a mainstream education.
13 - EmoryAlum
[personal attack deleted by comments editor] PoliSci/Econ major, it figures. I guess that some things never change.
In '81, I took PoliSci 101. I recall suggesting that we had too many federal departments, and we might want to consider eliminating some. The horrified look on the prof's face, and various encounters with PoliSci majors, convinced me to avoid that department entirely. =)
On the bright side, Mr. Casso does list comedy as an interest, perhaps he can contribute to the Spoke, they would appreciate this article.
14 - Zach
You forget to mention that Ron Paul has already shown that he can reduce the deficit and set this nation back on track financially. He released a budget that balances unlike every other candidate at the time. Gary Johnson has also shown that libertarian governance works. He cut his state government by almost half without firing one person. He left New Mexico with a billion dollar surplus. Ron Paul doesn't want the gold standard, he has said that. He has a responsible way to phase the government out of the marketplace and create real growth. The liberty movement is on to something.
15 - Glenn Contrarian
Andrew -
It looks like you just got introduced to what happens anytime someone says something that puts Ron Paul in a bad light...no matter how truthful it is.
Paulbots also don't realize that Paul has stated that he believes that the Civil Rights Act was a BAD thing, that he would have voted against it, and that businesses have a RIGHT to discriminate on basis of race, creed, color, religion, etc. And Paulbots flatly ignore the statements from his own campaign manager in the 1990's that indicated that Paul knew very well that racist statements were being made in HIS newsletter.
Now watch, Andrew, as the Paulbots attack these facts, too...because it doesn't matter to them that these are factual statements.
16 - Dr Dreadful
Before this gets any further out of hand, a quick explanation of the comments policy for those who have trouble with distinctions.
Joe Scarborough is a public figure and so is unlikely to be personally troubled by anything Mr Casso may call him. This is not what the Blogcritics comments policy's proscription against personal attacks means.
Mr Casso himself, on the other hand, is a private individual. You are all welcome to criticize his article and the conclusions he draws, but personal insults by Blogcritics commenters against the site's authors or against other commenters will not be tolerated, as can be seen from the edited comments above.
Thank you.
Dr Dreadful
Assistant Comments Editor
17 - Andrew Casso
Garret -
Paul said it isn't the *government's* responsibility to treat sick people without health insurance - which is exactly how I characterized his comment. He answered the question "no" because in his fairy world private charities can adequately meet the health demands of society. In the real world, however, the uninsured die or go bankrupt when they can't afford their treatments.
Glenn and Dr. Dreadful -
I appreciate your comments.
18 - Joe McPlumber
Dear Mr. Contrarian,
Yes, us "Paulbots" DO know Dr. Paul's position on the Civil Rights Act, and we agree with him. It was an outrageous stretch of the Commerce Clause and the precedent means that there are no practical limits to the federal government's authority. Yes, that's a bad thing, in our view. Very bad.
19 - Bob Dole
If something happened along the route and you had to leave your children with Bob Dole or Bill Clinton, I think you would probably leave them with Bob Dole.
20 - Tracy Dickson
Glenn Contrarian-
Nice try to distorting Dr. Paul’s record by only stating part of the story to try and paint him as a racist. You are right that he would vote against the civil rights act. He would vote against it because he believes in personal rights not group rights. And of course, no slam job would be complete without bring up the newsletters. You can push whatever false message that you want. After all it is your right as an individual. But I do know one thing, you cannot find or show one video clip of Dr. Paul in his own words, over his 30 plus years in the public eye that show him not be compassionate towards all individual rights. His 30 years of votes on record also show that individual liberties are at the core of his principles. Remember the dream-“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”. In my individual opinion, the content of Dr. Paul’s character is what is missing in so many of the people representing us in D.C..
21 - Andrew Casso
Joe -
Thanks for being honest. I believe if more people knew Dr. Paul would have marched on *that* side of the civil rights movement, he would have substantially fewer supporters.
22 - Geeza
For a start, Romney is a standard bearer for Plasticine politicians. The only difference between him and Obama is that Obama panders to the leftist base of his party to win the nomination and Romney panders to the right to win the nomination. Having won the nomination, they both then proceed to take a dump on their party bases in order and pander to special interest groups like Wall St and the Military Industrial Complex. The only real choice between the two is whether you want an 'R' president or a 'D' president. Independents might as well flip a coin. They both represent what is truly disgusting about politics today.
23 - DUH
Hi I'm in college, majoring in poli-sci and economics. My reading comprehension sucks. I think I'll go play COD now.
24 - KittenJuggler
PolySci major at Emory. Of course, you want socialism so you don't starve and die.
25 - Willis
Andrew,
I'd have more respect for your argument if you were majoring in something hard (and useful).
So, to your liberal arts mind, you think it makes sense to vote for a candidate because he is the official "choice"?
Sorry Sonny Jim, but that's just plain dumb.
If you want a career in politics or economics, when you grow up, lose the naivete.