2007 Republican Presidential Debate #1

So I decided to watch the debate last night (or try since my computer connection at home kept cutting in and out and then when to my mother-in-law’s to watch the last 15 minutes on TV, missing another 15 minutes in the process). I missed the first democratic debate, but read many commentaries on it that all basically concluded that Obama took a step ahead through his general like-ability and debating skills while Hilary lost some ground by trying to play it safe and not really answer the hard questions. Much in a similar manner, the republican leader (Guiliani) came across pretty flat- all he wanted to talk about was 9-11 and a couple policies that he enacted while mayor without presenting any real ideas himself. When they asked him about abortion it was hilarious as he tried to appeal to the RNC base by talking about how he thought abortion was bad while still saying that he sort of supported a woman’s right to choose. Romney really was the only one who came across with the air of a president while McCain looked like he was alternating between sleep and anger (I’ll follow Osama to the gates of Hell!).

Anyway, I was most impressed by Ron Paul. Who? Yeah, I had never heard of him before either. He was the only one who came across as believable and competent (Brownback was believable but also was only comfortable talking about abortion, Huckabee wasn’t bad but didn’t stand out, and the rest were pretty much not believable), and while I didn’t agree with everything he said, you could tell that he knew exactly what he thought about the issues, that he had spent considerable time thinking out his stances, and most importantly that he was straightforward about where he stands. There was no waffling, there was no attempt to appeal to the base in spite of what he thought, there were only his beliefs and 30+ years in congress to support them: He is adamantly pro-life. He is very intelligent. He opposes the Iraq war, and voted against it in 2002, not because he is a liberal pacifist, but because he is a historical conservative who supports American independence with sound reasoning. He supports the 2^nd amendment. He is consistently pro-business, but has no connections to big business. He supports a repeal of the 16^th amendment (Income taxes) in favor of a VAT or a national sales tax. He has always been small government and backs that up with his record (He annually returns a portion of his operating budget to the government as a statement of principal). And he is probably one of the few remaining strict constitutionalists, going so far as to oppose FIAT currency (currency not based on an external standard such as silver or gold).

If you hadn’t guessed already, he formerly identified himself as a libertarian and carries much of that with him today. All of that being said, I don’t think he could ever be president, but the more votes he gets the better in my book as it will challenge the RNC to return to its conservative roots and just maybe someone will put him in a good cabinet position so they can learn from his constitutionality. I’ll watch a few more debates and keep reading, but I think he just might be leading for my vote at this point.