If you're a Catholic and seriously interested/ concerned about this election, please listen to what Tom Woods has to say, as a faithful Catholic and brilliant scholar:
See his website and the original post here.
Fellow Catholics, I know Santorum has a great pro-life record and strong personal morals, but that is not a reason to endorse him as President. We are shooting ourselves in the feet (both) if we remain so inconsistent in our choice of politicians and the issues at hand.
Julie:
ReplyDeleteI have been a "lukewarm" Paul supporter for years now. I "traded him in" this year for a newer model, or so I thought. Just as I was coming back to his camp, someone posed a REALLY difficult argument for me to shake from my mind.
Ron Paul is a life-long politician (served 20+ years in Congress). And is a perpetual candidate, especially for President.
I am not saying these are deal breakers, I just cant get out of my mind, a guy that is good on many issues, but is perpetually seeking office. There seems to be a disconnect there between what he advocates and what he practices.
What do you think? Does that bother you? I know you are good at thinking things through and hope you can offer a response... I want to shake this argument, just cant so far...
Hi there! Yes, I could see how that argument would shake-- but here's more perspective:
ReplyDelete1. Paul is a life-long politician; he is also an ob-gyn doctor who took a brief stint from politics to focus more attention on his medical practice. This is why he has nothing to gain from politics. There is a different than serving one's country as a civic duty. He is not in politics to make a career. He has a career. He wants to make a difference and help our country.
2. Paul is a perpetual candidate, especially for President: Paul first ran for president in 2008, and then again in 2012. He is no Ralph Nader.
I don't think there is a disconnect between what he advocates and practices. Wanting limited and less government does not mean he should not run for a government job; it means he thinks he would uphold the Constitution and lead our country well.
I think there are a lot of nit-picking out there. It's easy to say, there's no perfect candidate. And I agree with that. But for Catholics, we need to look at consistency. And I find a Baptist from Texas to be "more Catholic" than another from PA and still another from... well, wherever Gingrich is from. Paul delivered over 4,000 babies and is against abortion. He's been married to the same woman for over 54. Yet, because he is for accountability in the Middle East (unlike Gingrich) and because he does not want drones attacking countries (unlike Santorum), he is an isolationist. No-- he is not an interventionist. We need to get out of the Middle East for policy, peace and prosperity's sake. We can't afford the war. We can't risk lives over a war where most people don't even know why we're over there. Moreover, he has such a clear understanding of the problems with the Fed and government intervention, etc. and, most importantly, he has the record to prove it. His re-election in his district should be a positive, not a negative.
I think it's easy to spin Paul, but he has nothing to lose but the election by telling the truth. He also has one of the strongest (if not *the* strongest) grassroots support. People need to stop dismissing how well he appeals to all different kinds of people because (drum roll, please!) he appeals only to the Constitution, not his own beliefs. I think that takes a lot of courage.