Ron Paul Defines Conservatism at Tonight’s Debate
The last question asked by the NBC moderators tonight was about how each of the candidates have advanced conservatism. Mitt Romney talked about his business experience. Newt Gingrich attempted to align himself with Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Rick Santorum did a good job in explaining how Mitt and Newt’s support for individual healthcare mandates, TARP and cap-and-trade calls into question both men’s conservative credentials.
Ron Paul pointed out that conservatism is supposed to mean smaller government and more liberty. Paul then suggested that Republicans have completely lost sight of this definition. He’s right.
Romney, Gingrich and Santorum’s records are all riddled with support for bigger government (Santorum’s own offenses include supporting Medicare Plan D and No Child Left Behind, for starters) and all three have been willing to sacrifice constitutional liberties in the name of “security.” The Patriot Act, support for indefinite detention and other anti-4th Amendment measures are prime examples, but so are the amount of money every candidate but Paul is willing to spend overseas in the name of “security.”
The reason the other candidates can’t find big government offenses in Paul’s record is because their aren’t any. The reason the other candidates can’t offer any spending cuts–much less the $1 trillion Paul offers–is because they’ve resigned themselves to the idea that America’s foreign policy status quo must remain intact. No questions. No reassessment. No cost/benefit analyses. All but Paul want more of the same.
Every candidate except Paul offers zero cuts. Every candidate except Paul consistently gives up more of our constitutional liberties.
If conservatism truly means smaller government and more liberty, then only one conservative stood on that debate stage tonight.
