The Rons

When watching the Republicans on the Campaign trail this primary season there is one name that you hear so much that, if you didn't know better, you would think that he was a current candidate. That name is Ronald Reagan.

The current crop of candidates have referenced our 40th President, Ronald Wilson Reagan, so many times because they all want us to think that they are just like him. They want us to think that they are going to be the return of the best President in recent history. For any candidate running for office today, Reagan is the gold standard for what a Republican needs to be. The problem is that most of them don't really understand, in my opinion, what it was that made Reagan such a great man, and such a great President.

For starters, it is clear that Reagan was a very strong leader, but, we can see that in people like Giuliani, and probably McCain and Thompson, and, to a lesser extent, Romney, so there must be something more right? Well, Reagan was also very good with a speech, very good with words, and getting his points across in an understandable manner, but so is Huckabee, and so is Thompson and Romney, and even McCain and Giuliani do pretty well here, and, for that matter, so did Bill Clinton. Reagan was intelligent, but so are the current crop. Reagan was a patriot, but that doesn't make him stand out either. He was a very likable person, but hey, so is Huckabee, and you know what I think of him. Despite the spin Reagan's strength wasn't even to be found in ultra-conservatism, or being the ultimate republican. What made him so special was his Character. Ronald Reagan was a man of integrity. He cared more for doing what was right than what was politically expedient. He knew how to pick his battles, when to compromise and when to stand up and fight. These are the qualities that set him apart, and these are the qualities that seem to me to be sorely lacking in some of the current candidates.

As much as many Republicans miss Ronald Wilson Reagan, the sad truth is that he's not coming back, and despite the claims, none of the current candidates are a return of Reagan, not even Fred Thompson, though, to be fair, he and Ron Paul are about the only two who haven't made such a claim as far as I know.

On the subject of Ron Paul, I have a few things to get off my chest. Anyone who reads hear on any sort of a regular basis knows that I'm not a Ron Paul supporter. I have even said that he may well be insane, but that's not really fair and I apologize for going that far in my assessment, however, some of his foreign policy idea's do seem a little bit nutty.

The fact is that, while I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, I do respect the man, and he deserves some respect. Let's look at what Ron Paul is. He is a Doctor, a Veteran, as well as a Politician. He is a Conservative, wanting to cut spending, cut taxes, and cut the size of Government. He is a Patriot, even his nuttier seeming stances are positions he has taken because he believe that they are best for the USA. He is an intelligent man, in fact, I think he may well be the smartest person running for President in any party at present. He is a strict Constitutionalist, probably understanding the document better that most politicians and even most judges. Suffice it to say, I have a lot of respect for the man, and I think he deserves it, I just don't agree with all of his positions.

What bothers me is the way he is treated and marginalized by the press. Do they fear him? Are they afraid that if they gave him fair and unbiased coverage that he might have a shot at the Presidency? Maybe they do, and they certainly wouldn't let that happen without a fight. I don't mean to say that Paul is the only victim of this bias, but he is clearly among the biggest, along with Duncan Hunter, and, to a lesser extent, Fred Thompson, all of whom the press want out of the running. Maybe we should give that some thought, people that the press doesn't want to become President might be the best options available.

One thing that bothers me even more is something that happened at the last debate. Other candidates have taken issue with Ron Paul's stances before, and that is fine. I have no problem if they disagree with him, and if they want to debate him, that is what it's all about. However, Mitt Romney went WAY over the line. During a discussion of the recent events involving our Naval vessels near Iran last week Ron Paul was very seriously explaining his opinion of the situation and what he thought needed to be done, or not done would probably describe it better, when Mitt Romney breaks in and says that Ron Paul "should not be reading as many of [Mahmoud] Achmadinejad’s press releases." What a disgusting and reprehensible thing for Romney to say! Again, it doesn't bother me if they disagree, but with that one little statement, Romney suggested that Paul is an Iranian sympathizer, and questioned his patriotism. I think Romney owes Paul a serious apology for this garbage. Ron Paul may be many things, but he is an American Patriot, and deserves to be taken seriously, as he is a very serious man. Also, it was obvious that Dr. Paul was very upset by the statement, though he couldn't be heard, you could read his lips saying, "Make fun, buddy!" And I don't blame him for being upset, I was too.

In fairness, McCain poked some fun at Paul later in the debate, but there was a huge difference, both the timing and the content of McCain's jab were far and away more appropriate than the outrageous and disgusting cheap shot leveled by Romney.

I'm also sick and tired, and just generally fed up, with Politicians abandoning reasonable and rational debate in favor of one liners and inane sound-bites. I guess we have the mainstream Media to thank for that too.