Old Time Radio at OTRCat!

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Why no Paul.

A dear lady on Facebook commented:

I can not understand why Ron Paul does not have stronger support.
 To which I responded: 
 Because the mainstream Repubs AND Democrats have no desire to operate Constitutionally. Zero desire.
A local businessman and church person said:
 I agree positionally about 80-85% with Ron Paul. However, the remaining percentage is off the charts in another area code entirely, with regards to my family's beliefs.  
(I would lay odds that the sticking points are the Holy War on Drugs, and Paul's belief that not every war the US participates in is Divinely Inspired.)
I responded:
The (moot) question is, do you want a President who will govern MORE constitutionally, or less? We have the unenviable choice of a big-government Democrat, or a big-government Republican, which is to say, little choice at all. "Anybody but ______" has continued to get us mired more deeply presidency by presidency. Maybe we as voters need to drop the pragmatism tactic, and really vote for principles. (Holding one's nose and pulling the lever cannot be defined as principled.) Constitution or no? Herein lies the choice. This November, we have next to none. 
 No responses. We shall see. How someone can throw over ~85% agreement over a few sticking points is beyond me, especially in that Dr. Congressman Paul is pro-life AND pro-Constitution. 


Michael W said...

I hate to put on my Grumpy Cynic hat, but I've always felt that the more partisan a person is, the more the Constitution seems like a minor annoyance (at best) and a Socialist plot (at worst).

Doom said...

Well, a few thoughts. For R. Paul, I am at about 65%, with a lead for not actually belonging to either party. The problem is 35% of the 45% against is non-negotiable. Well, that and... whether you want to hear this or not... his "followers". Many of them, I don't know about you personally well enough, actually make him somewhat unpalatable. Hmm, smells like... teen spirit. And while that's groovy, has sex appeal, I rejected such and similar notions longggg ago.

As for a constitution minded president? Without a like minded senate, house, supreme court, and majority of states that were that way, it would be nothing but token. Could cause some gridlock. But mostly things would be negotiated. Or there would be a coupe (at least Marshal Law as the government used the military to keep the place at least with lights on).

As for the constitution? I do believe in it. But it IS a cage. A very large cage, a rather comfortable cage, but a cage. I'm not sure libertarians would truly be any happier confining them(our sometimes)selves to it than they are now. And left libertarians think no more of it then they think of... anything or anyone else. Further, there isn't exactly a strict version of the constitution that is even legally permissible at this time. Just getting voting to how it should be would take another civil war (and even then, I don't propose all the same restrictions... pretty much male taxpayers over 25 would be my goal for voters, if too the hope would be to slowly shrink taxpayers back to landowners as it first was as well... Oh, and I would give vets the vote, except women... though... they wouldn't be in the military anymore either).


Doom said...

My math sucks... but you got the drift... Take no offense, about Paul's followers, unless you want to though.

Michael W said...

@Doom --- the Constitution is indeed a cage. And, to my way of thinking, a very necessary one. More and more I find appeals being made not to reason, but to the baser instincts of our nature. Unfortunately, many in our society seem open to this sort of approach.

As bothersome as it may seem to many people, the United States is a pluralistic society. That's why the Constitution opens with "We the People" (as opposed to "We the NFL" or "We the Methodist Church" or "We the Nebraska Philatelist Society"). The document clearly specifies that its intention is "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty". Unfortunately (again) for some people, the United States is not an exclusive club. More and more, though, and in the past few decades, I've been seeing an increasing belief that this country is (or should be) exactly that, and that people who are following their individual concepts of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are being treated with suspicion, and even considered enemies in some quarters.

Back in my KTRU days the Tom Robinson Band had a song entitled "Power in the Darkness". Within the song was a commentary by a (supposedly) imaginary member of the British Parliament which, to my way of thinking, describes the views of many people today:

"Today, institutions fundamental to the British system of Government are under attack: the public schools, the house of Lords, the Church of England, the holy institution of Marriage, even our magnificent police force are no longer safe from those who would undermine our society, and it's about time we said 'enough is enough' and saw a return to the traditional British values of discipline, obedience, morality and freedom.

What we want is:

Freedom from the reds and the blacks and the criminals,
Prostitutes, pansies and punks.
Football hooligans, juvenile delinquents, Lesbians and left wing scum.
Freedom from the niggers and the Pakis and the unions. Freedom from the Gypsies and the Jews.
Freedom from leftwing layabouts and liberals. Freedom from the likes of YOU!"

Against this rising wave the only defense this nation can depend upon is the cage of the Constitution. A cage indeed! But it can also serve as a fortress.

The Aardvark said...

Just like Jesus, Doom! The church would be GREAT if it wasn't for some of the people! Yeah, some of the Paulistas are pretty...ripe, personality-wise.

As to the Constitution, yes, guys, it IS a cage. It is a cage for the Government, with which our "Rulers" are trying to cage US.

Michael, the US is a pluralistic society for certain sure,and it IS a club, but a club for Members Only. We invite people to join according to the by-laws, but now (and this may be a tangent), the clubhouse is swamped with party-crashers. We need the Pauls and their (sometimes freaky) adherents to call us back to the clubhouse, the bylaws, the fortress. I've got some thoughts on this business coming up.