Considering Ron Paul

The perception of Ron Paul for many citizens is that he’s a bit out there, the crazy grandpa or the far-out old guy that’s running for the presidency. These are, of course, silly labels used by sillier people. However, because of the shallow and repetitive talking points in this dreadfully long primary season, for intellectual stimulation, I have been forced to take a look at Ron Paul. I simply can’t perpetually write about Romney the businessman, Santorum the preacher, or Newt, the man with baggage. As a conservative, a little more right than most, I have some rock-solid reasons you could jump on the Ron Paul band-wagon. Here’s reason number one.

Ron Paul wants to decrease the size of government. I believe in small government. So Mr. Paul and I easily reach agreement here. I question government’s intent and motivation regarding all things. It is filled with hypocrisy, saturated with corruption and it is administered by, for the most part, self-serving people who value their future more than the country’s. Would it be so bad to thin them a bit?

When I was young, being a government employee was not the celebrated career it is now. It was commonly known then that the government hires virtually anyone, no matter the true competencies of the individual. And it fires virtually no one, regardless of the level of incompetence. The practice still exists, it’s just hidden better from the public. For example, in Dayton, Ohio, you can score a 58% and 66% on a two-part exam and still become a police officer. I’ve been long out of high school but doesn’t that equate to an F and a D minus? But it gets better. These scores were decreased from 66% and 72% — obviously completely outrageous requirements. Interesting situation that you can fail your test yet get job, a pension and a gun. And, perhaps most tragically, we expect these flunkies to make quality decisions while on the beat. It’s absurd. More specifically, it’s government. And you may have heard, Congress in 2010, actually passed Obama-care before major sections were written. We’ve just recently learned the costs of Obama-care have doubled. How trust-worthy are these people? The politicians that pass these types of legislation are not concerned about you, me or the quality of the country. They are concerned about their re-election, nothing more. We could clean a few of these folks out and improve things a bit, don’t you think?

I also doubt the government’s ability regarding all enterprises. And since Ron Paul wants to do away with several government agencies, we again see eye to eye. Most would agree the government was slow to react to the BP spill. It seems common knowledge now that government was the real disaster during Hurricane Katrina. Recall in 2009 when the government had to announce it was 30% off on vaccine projections. Have you heard of the Benjamin Isherwood and the Henry Eckford naval vessels? Some $600 million was flushed.

Mr. Paul has said he would do away with the Department of Education. Promoted and politicized by the National Education Association (NEA) a labor union, and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 17, 1979, it began operating on May 16, 1980. The point here is that it’s not very old. America existed, give or take, some 200 years without it. Do we really need it? In 2008, William Bennett, former Secretary of Education, outlined 20 concerns regarding US education. Among them was that, “American 12th graders rank 19th out of 21 industrialized countries in mathematics achievement and 16th out of 21 nations in science. Our advanced physics students rank dead last.” More recently, reported in 2010 that 1.2 million students drop out of high school every year, some 7,000 per day. Do you feel these types of statistics are impressive? Ron Paul doesn’t. Nor do I.

The Department of Energy, another target of Ron Paul, is a similar situation, being relatively young (1977). The Department of Energy’s fiscal 2012 budget request was for $21 billion. Yes, that’s with a “b”. With that kind of funding, how can we have any energy problems at all? Apparently, some folks aren’t doing their jobs. So, I agree with Mr. Paul, let’s dump it.

Of course, these examples are just water drops in a sea of government ineptitude. I can go on and on and on. Google the subjects and you can read for months.

In my life, the only thing I’ve seen the government do well is perpetuate itself. And it does that by force, by deceiving the public and stepping on the Constitution. Name a program and you can find horrifying incompetence. Name an agency and you can find disturbing short-sightedness and waste. Name an institution and you can find corruption and the exploitation of the citizenry. Only the most absurdly naive are blind to this and only those with an agenda try to deny this.

Ron Paul wants to shrink government. He says he’ll eliminate the departments of Energy, HUD, Commerce and Education, as well as a few others. As a citizen, observing the changes in American society over the last 30 years or so, I’d support Ron Paul in his quest to shrink government. To me, it’s clear government doesn’t need to be small, it needs to be infinitesimal.

Follow I.M. Citizen on Facebook or visit at

One Response

  1. […] Considering Ron Paul ( […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: