Ron Paul's philosophy on government is simple - the Constitution of the United States, as amended over the years, is just as good now as it was for our Founding Fathers. Our Constitution prescribes a federal government of limited, enumerated powers, with everything else to be left to the States and the people, a concept expressed in the Tenth Amendment. We've strayed far from this concept, mostly over the last seventy years or so. Dr. Paul went to Washington with the notion that any bill that was not specifically authorized by the Constitution would not receive his assent - and he has stuck to this principle, earning him the nickname "Dr. No" on Capitol Hill, as well as the respect of his colleagues for being a man of principle.
Six days ago at the Whittemore Center - not very far from where I sit right now - Mike Huckabee attacked Paul's stance on Iraq (Paul is for an immediate and total troop withdrawal), saying that staying the course in Iraq was the "honorable" thing to do. Stephen Colbert may have been swayed by Huckabee's argument (on last night's Report), but Paul's policy is the truly honorable one. It would be a clear, resounding signal that we will leave other sovereign states to manage their own affairs, and restore the place of honor our country held for much of its early history, as a beacon of inspiration to all the world's nations.
One issue on which I significantly disagreed with Dr. Paul was abortion. But after reading about his experiences in the House of Representatives and as an OB/GYN, which include the delivery of over 4,000 babies without ever considering abortion, I've actually come around to his corner. I've always characterized myself as pro-choice, and I still do; so is Dr. Paul, for that matter. From how you (not Washington) should spend your American dollars, to whether you should be able to access any drug you think can help with whatever ails you, the options should be in your hands, not spelled out to you in some obscure paragraph in the Code of Federal Regulations. However, on a very small number of things, there can't be any choice - and one of those things is ending the lives of those who can't defend themselves. I used to think that there was some magic point at which a fetus transformed from a clump of cells into a viable human being. But there's absolutely no way to know exactly when that day comes for any one baby, to say nothing of attempting to set a blanket rule for a state or the entire country. That being the case, I'm inclined to fail conservatively, and default to the moment of conception. I've always thought that Roe v. Wade was a horrendous decision, an unconstitutional power grab from the States by the Supreme Court. I still believe that to be the case, and that the States should have the full range of the police powers reserved to them by the Constitution. If they ever regain those powers, they should act decisively to protect the unborn.
A Paul presidency would give us all reason to hope for freedom - a domestic policy that will restore to us the freedoms the Federal government has slowly chipped away at over many years, and a foreign policy that will decisively safeguard our freedoms from external threat. I'm not alone in seeing this; Paul has won five of the six Republican debates, according to post-debate polls. Though the traditional mass media has largely ignored his candidacy, he's done very well to harness the power of the Internet to gain support. I thank Dr. Paul for giving Americans who truly love freedom an option in this race, and look forward to seeing his candidacy gain momentum throughout the end of this year and into 2008.