Why am I backing an underdog in the 2008 election? Ron Paul spoke with Tucker Carlson today on MSNBC. Tucker asked him about some of his decentralized economic policy, asking him outright if he sounded callous or mean. Dr. Paul's response was fantastic. He spoke about how Federal programs aren't working out, how FEMA seems to make more of a mess than local efforts would have provided.
The more I think about what he said, the more it makes sense to me. He used the term 'bread crumbs promised' by the federal government. Is it good to depend upon the freebies that the government provides us rather than depending on ourselves and our localities to provide? When you give someone a helping hand, isn't the common problem that the person you've helped will only look to you for a handout each and every time they get into trouble and end up depending on you instead of themselves? For the freebies, don't we also have to give up something in return, part of our freedom? Is that loss worth the price?
And what is the cost of a government handout? If the government gives you $1, but it costs the country $10, then what is the benefit to the country in the end? Aren't we just subsidizing a huge inefficient bureaucracy whose primary purpose is to shuffle an ever-devaluing dollar?
These are all just thinking points for me right now, and I welcome debate, but this man makes a lot of sense to me when I hear him speak. Hopefully his campaign takes off. Perhaps the Republicans will realize that to win in 2008 they will have to offer up a candidate that is very different from the current regime. Swing voters, fence-sitters and true conservatives aren't going to vote for Rudy - he's just more of what we already have.