Ron Paul Takes a Stand in Iowa  
Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2007 

Throughout the years I have received comments in support of Rep. Ron 
Paul, R-Texas. If he makes a major speech, casts a lone vote, or is 
running for re-election, no other political figure has continued to 
have a lasting following more than this unique congressman from 
Texas. 
A regular reader of this commentary asked me to explain why Paul has 
continued to have a following which exceeds that of some of the front-
running candidates in the Ames Iowa straw poll. 
Inasmuch as the enquirer asked his question the week before the Iowa 
straw poll, I thought it fair to offer a few comments about Ron Paul, 
who received very little attention from the national media. 
Indeed, Paul received some 9 percent-10 percent of the vote. But my 
dear friend from the neighboring state of Wisconsin, former Gov. 
Tommy Thompson, put all he had into the poll, and he didn't do as 
well, causing him to withdraw as a presidential candidate. 
And there was Mayor Rudolph (Rudy) Giuliani, the crime fighter from 
New York, and former Sen. Fred D. Thompson, the apparent darling of 
the conservatives, and others who didn't even bother to set foot in 
Iowa, who also ended up with no base in Iowa. And yet here was good 
old Ron Paul, lumbering along, whom no one expected to win, place or 
show, who yet managed to survive the politics of an important 
bellwether state, surviving to fight another day. 
The question is why and that is what Pitts and other readers want to 
know. 
First, Ron Paul is different and that in and of itself draws a 
certain amount of support. 
Second, Ron Paul is a consistent follower of the Constitution, of 
whom there are few. 
Third, Ron Paul represents an authentic point of view, once 
articulated by the late Sen. Robert A. Taft, R-Ohio, and he sticks 
with it. 
Take one of the early debates when Paul nearly got ousted from the 
whole process. Ron Paul said we are under attack in the Middle East 
because we have meddled in that area ourselves. 
He paraphrased the late Sen. Taft by saying we should not be involved 
in wars initiated by other nations. 
Mayor Rudy said he had heard many silly things down through the years 
as to why we are involved in the Middle East but this one tops them 
all. By articulating the authentic Taft view, Ron Paul was nearly 
ousted from further debates. 
In fact, the Michigan State GOP chairman is attempting to bar 
independents from voting in the Michigan Republican primary. That 
would preclude the following that Ron Paul has among independent 
voters in Michigan from so voting. 
It likely would preclude Ron Paul from getting any Michigan votes in 
the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis in early September 
of 2008. 
That is the most reprehensible of all of the moves against Ron Paul. 
If he has a small national following, as apparently he does, so be 
it. But he alone is willing to challenge the interests which have 
come to dominate the Republican Party in recent years. 
Accordingly, Ron Paul has stood alone in recent years in following 
President George Washington's advice never to meddle in foreign 
affairs. Taft took up Washington's cause and paid dearly for it. 
Now only Ron Paul defends what may be termed the authentic Washington—
Taft point of view. 
On the other hand, I never have understood Rep. Paul's many votes 
against our defense system. Some votes against the defense 
establishment in this country, yes, but to vote against defending 
America I cannot understand. 
The Constitution explicitly delegates the federal government the 
power to defend our country. To vote against some military programs, 
sure, but all of them? 
There must be reasonableness and responsibility. 
 


Reply via email to