Quote:
Originally Posted by walsh
I don't think he's a moralist. More like a pragmatist. He opposes their foreign wars because it's bad for America. Which is probably why he's running with the republicans. Though republican seems to stand for pro-war no matter what it does for the country, so it's no surprise many don't like him.
|
He's not a moralist like say Newt Gingrich (and considering Newt's background - well that's another story) or Huckabee, Santorum and so on... in this sense I agree with you.
Here is how I think he is similar to these intellectual lesser lights on the right:
This is the screed. Success is a matter of discipline. If you have discipline you will be successful. If you do not have discipline you will not only fail to be successful but you will also be an ethically challenged person. The reason for this is that the person in question rejected the system which provided him (or her - particularly
her) the ultimate moral authority - a father (and barring that a father figure). I doubt that Paul would go off on some rant about Natalie Portman a la Huckabee but the philosophy driving them is the same for both of them. Anyway, these people (the poor) don't have discipline, and without discipline they can't be moral. These are people then who have earned their poverty. Ron Paul is similar to the other Republicans in that he is all about personal responsibility and not so much about social responsibility.
I think this article is worth a look:
http://readersupportednews.org/off-s...es-really-want