I swear to God I will vote for Ron Paul

Okay, maybe.  I’m not sold on the old fart, but the grumpy old man is surprisingly logical, whereas Santorum is unappealingly emotional.

Santy and Paul got in a tiff at the Iowa debate about how to handle Iran.  Paul doesn’t seem to think we should do anything with them, except try to trade with them.  Santy got in a huff about how Iran is a threat – which it IS – and then proceeded to appear as if he doesn’t even understand why.

It’s not merely that America-hating radical Islamists are nutbags.  It’s that the America-hating radial Islamists are in charge in Iran largely because of SOMETHING WE DID.  Oops.

“Paul responded that conflict between Iran and the United States goes back much further than 1979 — going to when the United States installed the Shah of Iran in a military coup in 1953, with blowback coming later in the Iranian revolution of 1979.”

Fact: we got rid of one douche and got some worse douches.  If Santorum understands that, he didn’t show it:

“Santorum responded that Paul sounded like President Obama — in apologizing for the United States.”

No, dipstick – he was explaining history.  What happened.  Go look it up.  Do I really need to tell you that the US government has always been comprised of MANY PEOPLE who give advice and make decisions, and sometimes the results of these decisions are not so great?

I’m on the fence about whether we should just blow Iran the fuck up (well, not entirely – strategically, with conventional weapons, not nukes) or keep a close eye on it while using our resources to strengthen America and regroup our military (in case some shit does go down and Israel needs backup*).  America’s in bad shape right now, and I don’t think we’re in a position right now to tell Iran it can suck it, particularly not with our borders wide open and nearly goal-less** wars in 3.5 countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan).

*When Paul said, in debate one, that Israel is too dependent on the US and that it, being a sovereign nation, shouldn’t need to get our approval for anything, I cheered – it makes me happy when people on TV say what I’ve been thinking.

**”Fighting terrorism” is not a MEASURABLE goal.  Terrorists need to eat dirt, but there will be a plethora of terrorists for centuries to come, and bombs alone won’t get them to stop being jerks, because bombs do not kill ideas.  We need to fight smart, and the smartest things we can do right now are:

1) SEND BARACK BACK TO CHICAGO, where he’ll get a cushy do-nothing high-paying job, and ideally not do too much more damage to our country;

2) FIX THE ECONOMY by not being class-warfare-fomenting Marxist whiner assholes [Hayek, not Keynes, dammit!]; and

3) SECURE OUR BORDERS, because, um, duh.  Also, 3B: leave Libya because Congress didn’t approve military action there.

Then we can get to work on deprogramming the populace (NEA, Department of Education – looking at you), addressing the causes of high healthcare costs, repealing unconstitutional bullshit, etc.

Then, we will be so undeniably awesome again, and The Superpower once more.  Then our threats will mean something.  Until then, we’re spreading ourselves too thin and not being terribly impressive.

Meanwhile, let’s let the guys on the ground set some achievable goals for Iraq and Afghanistan since they’re already there, and plan to bring them home – but NOT TELL EVERYONE EXACTLY WHEN.  Oh, and never negotiate with the Taliban again.  They suck.

So that’s the  Conservative Werewolf plan.  Not exactly in line with Paul’s, considering his desire to bring the troops home ASAP, but not entirely out of line, either.  The question, as with any candidate, will be: What differences am I willing to put up with?

Oh, and you know what?  During the next debate, Paul should just read from his website when asked about issues of national defense.  Apparently, he’s not against military action.  Who knew?  Seriously dude, you need to tell us these things.


3 Responses to “I swear to God I will vote for Ron Paul”

  1. Brian Underwood Says:

    haha, I definitely liked the post.

    You’re right – Ron Paul took an academic stance to our foreign relations and noted the entire history behind it (granted, he is probably old enough to remember it compared to Santorum), but Santorum simply wants to take the easy “us vs. them” dichotomy without stopping to ask why they may dislike us in the first place.

    Don’t get me wrong, total non-interventionism argued by Ron Paul is not the -perfect- foreign policy, but it is definitely the -best- at this particular moment, and you did well explaining why.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: