The Jeffersonian: Politicks, Sports, and Culture

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Ron Paul- A Moment Of Truth

I wrote this last Wednesday:

Ron Paul and Shane Sklar

Ron Paul, Libertarian Republican, votes against the $50 billion relief money for Katrina-ravaged parts of the US. Alot of Dems yawn, saying stuff like, 'That's just Ron being Ron.' BOR blogs about it. BOR readers say essentially the same thing. One commenter (I'll give you BOR readers one guess as to who it is) actually praises Paul for voting no. Another commenter says this:

Paul's votes nay on everything. My hometown is in district 14. The voters will never hear of this. Even if they did it isnt like they would do anything about it. No one has run against him as long as I can remember.

Funny thing though, just below this post, is one entitled, "Shane Sklar Kicks Off
Campaign In CD 14." No one comments on this post.

Truth of the matter is, it is Ron being Ron. Doesn't mean we have to like it. Doesn't mean we can't do everything in our power to kick him out. There's a real, live candidate running against Paul in CD 14. He's gonna raise some money and some hell. And he's going to be able to put up an ad in the Fall of 2006 talking about how Paul voted against the $50 billion and talk about how CD 14 has a whole lot of coast line itself. Would Ron have voted against this if it were CD 14 that was destroyed by Katrina? Or would that have been a justifiable government expenditure in Paul's book?

Now, via Greg Wythe, we find out Paul's justification:

Congress reacted to Katrina in the expected irresponsible manner. It immediately appropriated over $60 billion with little planning or debate. As with all rapid government expenditures, the amount of waste and mismanagement will be staggering. Congress knows it won’t need to raise taxes to pay the bill, because the Federal Reserve will accommodate reckless deficit spending.

My simple suggestion to my colleagues is this: Find dollar-for-dollar offsets for all hurricane relief spending while public attention remains focused on the destruction in New Orleans. Once interest in Katrina fades, other spending priorities will reassert themselves and any sense that tax dollars are finite will be lost. Congressional spending habits, in combination with our flawed monetary system, could bring us a financial whirlwind that makes Katrina look like a minor storm.

Greg comments:

In the World According to Ron Paul, destitute victims of Katrina should put their problems on hold till the Congressman from Alaska cedes back the funding for his silly little (yet expensive) highway. In the World According to Ron Paul, victims wondering where the next dollar is going to come from to get their family back on financial footing after a disaster such as Katrina ought to just get over themselves while we deliberate on the restoration of the gold standard for our currency.

This man has had over a decade to make his silly, pointless protest votes. But there is absolutely no answer to acts of nature such as Katrina (and quite possibly Rita) that do not involve spending more money. None. Nada. Anyone who has an alternate answer can check themselves in the looney bin.


So while a Cat. 4/5 hurricane slams into Paul's coastal district, remember that, to Paul, it's more important to engage in philosophical debates in a time of emergency.

A large swath of Paul's district is right in the middle of Rita's path.

Suddenly, we're not talking about hypotheticals. Odds are there's going to be damage, odds are the federal government is going to send some money down the Texas coastline. There's going to be a vote on this. Is Ron Paul going to vote yes or no? Kinda damned if he does and damned if he doesn't isn't he?