Jorgelito....I'll offer up an assessment of Ron Paul by the conservative pundit Armstrong Williams, with whom I agree on virtually nothing, except this:
Quote:
Just who is Ron Paul? Ask anyone on the Hill and they’ll tell you he’s a quirky House back-bencher often heralded for his “libertarian” views on issues. That’s not how I see it. For years, I’ve witnessed Congressman Paul (R-Texas) trot to the well of the House, only to vote no on seemingly every issue critical to this country. I’m not kidding — he’s voted against entire defense bills and the war in Iraq. “Well, he opposes the war,” you retort. OK, but why vote against farm bills? Water-quality bills? Anti-terrorism legislation? Education bills? Bills where he is the only Republican to vote no? To hear Congressman Paul tell his story, he doesn’t think the federal government should be involved in those issues. So why, then, is Ron Paul in Congress?!? Isn’t that his job — to ensure the taxpayer’s dollars are spent wisely and on the services that are necessary to run the Commonwealth? And now this guy wants to run for president??! Give me a break! There are far more qualified individuals who deserve a slot on that stage, and Ron Paul isn’t one of ’em.
http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/05/21/ron-who/
|
A postiion of "its not provided for in the Constitution and should be left up to the states" is not a solution to the challenges of competing in a global economy; providing opportunities for a livable wage to those on the margin or living in poverty; protecting the environment; ensuring energy independence and developing alternative energy resources; keeping the US in the forefront of medical, science and technology R&D; providing affordable health care, working with allies on common security issues, etc.
I dont see solutions from Paul on many of these issue; all I see is anti-federal rhetoric.
And I dont see any evidence of the broad appeal you say he has. Perhaps his sound bites during the debates was appealing. But`he still barely registers in single digits in the national polls and not much better in polls in Texas, where he is more widely known.
I am currently leaning towards Bill Richardson and still intrigued by Barak Obama, who I think may ultimately have the potential to be the best hope as a "uniter, not a divider" that was falsely promised by Bush and that the country desperately needs.