The Fed: End it or Mend it!

 Should we follow suite with Ron Paul's slogan and "end the fed"? Hedge fund manager David Einhorn seems to think so. He recently gave a comical, yet blatantly honest and scathing review of the federal reserve regarding their zero percent interest rate policy, said to carry through until 2014,

   “A jelly donut is a yummy mid-afternoon energy boost. Two jelly donuts are an indulgent breakfast. Three jelly donuts may induce a tummy ache. Six jelly donuts, that’s an eating disorder. Twelve jelly donuts is fraternity pledge hazing” (Fox Business News, 2012).

 Einhorn goes on to explain that the low interest rate that the federal reserve implemented will be hurting us in the long run. By raising the interest rate, families are able to bring in more money through savings account interest income. The higher the interest rates, the more revenue will be generated in someones savings accounts and CDs. Bonds are also being directly affected because at a 2% interest, the income is very minimal, causing many people to suspend retirement for the present time. Ron Paul, one of the biggest advocates against the Fed, with his slogan "end the fed", also agrees that the monetary policy that is currently being implemented is hurting more then it is helping.

“The Fed’s response to the crisis suggests that it believes the current crisis is a problem of liquidity. In fact it is a problem of poorly allocated investments caused by improper pricing of money and credit, pricing which is distorted by the Fed’s inflationary actions...We live in a world that seems to have abandoned the concept of savings and investment as the source of real wealth and economic growth. Financial markets clamour for more cheap money creation on the part of central banks. Hopes of further quantitative easing from the Fed, the Bank of England, or the Bank of Japan – or further longer-term refinancing operations from the ECB – buoy markets, while decisions not to intervene can cause stocks to plummet” (Fox Business News, 2012).

 During a meeting this past Tuesday on Capitol Hill, Ron Paul, head of the House committee that oversees America's central bank, was not the only one to vehemently voice his distaste for the federal reserve. Representative Kevin Brady (R) from Texas recently introduced legislation that would eliminate the

Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke

Fed’s directive of promoting maximum employment and price stability. Instead of putting all efforts towards stimulating the economy, Mr. Brady would rather see the Fed focus strictly on inflation. Surprisingly, Representative Barney Frank (D) even attended the meeting. His issue with the Fed is that it is spending too much time focusing on inflation and should instead be more aggressive in their efforts to  fix the economy from the recent recession. However, not surprisingly, not one current Fed worker attended the meeting. Since it would appear that the Fed does not seem eager to take constructive criticism by refusing to hear legitimate monetary policy issues, then I stand proudly in support Ron Paul's "end it or mend it" solution. 



 
                                                              Works Cited

David Einhorn and Ron Paul Tackldavid einhorn and ron paul tackle fed." Fox Business News. 5//2012, 5/9/2012. Web. 9 May 2012. <http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2012/05/09/david-einhorn-and-ron-paul-tackle-fed/

Yadron, Danny. "Ron Paul’s Hearing to Ask: Mend or End the Fed?." The Wall Street Journal. 5/7/2012, 5/7/2012. Web. 9 May 2012. <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/05/07/ron-pauls-hearing-to-ask-mend-or-end-the-fed/>

Challenging Romney's Poppycock Platform

It's not over for Ron Paul, not even close. While he understands that he will not be winning the GOP nomination, he continues to stay in the race. Could he possibly have an ulterior motive? He does not have nearly enough delegates to win but perhaps enough to cause a ruckus for Romney. There is speculation that he may be trying to divide the party at the GOP convention, a time when the party should instead be unify behind a single candidate (Romney). "They could start off by calling for a floor vote, and then jump up in blocs to nominate Paul, one state after another. He isn’t likely to actually get the nomination that way, but multiple states clamoring for him would embarrass the party and make things more difficult for Romney in the months before November" (Dwoskin, 2012). In order to mitigate the disaster, Romney might have to provide concessions to Ron. This may require Romney incorporating some of his [Ron] ideas into his campaign.With Ron's devout supports  and delegates (aka "Ron bots"), they have the power to make a splash at the convention.

This race is not even about winning for Ron, he instead seems most concerned with getting the libertarian ideology out there and to promote his ideals since they are so much different from both the Republican and the Democrat parties. This promotion is done in hopes that it will not just gather some of the true conservatives, but to also get the attention of the independents are still floundering over who to vote for. He wants to instill some of these "new" ideas into the republican party platform for (hopefully) this upcoming presidential election (Harris, 2012). He seems to call Romney's ideals hokum because they do not subscribe to a true constitutionalist perspective and insists on replacing Romney's ideas with his own. I suppose all we have left to do is take a ring-side seat and watch a (hopefully) intense GOP convention throw down take place. Ron is willing to fight to the end and determined to drastically influence the party:

 “That’s the fallback. If we don’t pull it off and we’re not in first place, yes, that would be a good goal...I run to win, and I have won a lot, but we also want to help direct the party and the country in a certain way, so that would be a very, very positive strategy to have an influence on the party” (Good, 2012).

                                                           Works Cited

Dwoskin, Elizabeth. "How Ron Paul Could Mess With Romney at the GOP Convention ." Bloomberg Business. Bloomberg, 5/7/2012. Web. 8 May 2012. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-07/how-ron-paul-could-mess-with-romney-at-the-gop-convention>

Good , Chris. "Ron Paul’s Not-So-Secret Plot for the GOP Convention." ABC News. ABC News, 5/7/22012. Web. 8 May 2012. <http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/ron-pauls-not-so-secret-plot-for-the-gop-convention/>
  
Harris, Paul. "How Ron Paul's far-reaching delegate strategy is starting to pay off." The Guardian, UK. The Guardian, 5/4/2012. Web. 8 May 2012. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/04/ron-paul-delegate-strategy-gop-nomination>

Election 2012: Obama v. Romney. Wait, Where's Ron?

As we get closer and closer to the 2012 Presidential Election, it appears that the fight is now between Obama and Romney. Where did Ron go? It seems as though his campaign has gone unnervingly silent. He recently won the election in Maine by gaining 21 of the 24 delegates, and also the Nevada election by receiving 22 of the 25 delegates. Did these small wins make any difference in the grand scheme of the political war? Unfortunately, it is nothing to get too excited about. Ron is still in a huge delegate deficit, having only accumulated 94 delegates, compared to Romney's 856 delegates (Hartman, 2012). What does not make sense is that he incessantly has massive turnouts at college rallys. Especially during a recent visit to University of California Davis, he had a turnout of over 5,000 students! But, despite the turn out, the enthusiastic crowds do not translate to votes. Perhaps someone should give his supporters a GPS because they seem to get lost on the way to the polls. 

UC Davis Rally. 5/3/2012

The news now seems to just revolve around Obama v. Romney debate since Romney is viewed as the only viable Republican contender. The New York Time's electoral map shows that the political battle is severely close. The link for this website is located on the top right hand corner. I HIGHLY recommend the link, it shows different electoral scenarios and you can even make you own political scenarios!

The delegate gap between Romney and Ron is so great, 762 to be exact, that it seems the ball is in Romney's court by a very long shot. However, despite the disadvantage, Ron Paul vehemently states the he will NOT drop out of the race just yet. In a recent interview he quite optimistically stated that he will not drop out "til all the votes are counted" and with regards to his campaign he commented, "we're doing very, very well" (Regan, 2012).

                                                               Works Cited

Hartman, Rachel. "Ron Paul wins Maine, Nevada delegates. But what does it mean?." Otus News. Otus Newsq, 5/7/2012. Web. May 7, 2012. <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/ron-paul-wins-maine-nevada-delegates/story?id=16296075

 Paul, Ron, perf. Ron Paul Says He’ll Stay in Race ‘Till the Votes Are Counted’. Perf. Trish Regan. Bloomberg, 2012. Web. 7 May 2012. <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-30/ron-paul-says-he-ll-stay-in-race-till-the-votes-are-counted-.html>. <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-30/ron-paul-says-he-ll-stay-in-race-till-the-votes-are-counted-.html>.

 "The Electoral Map: Building a Path to Victory." The New York Times. The New York Times, n.d. Web. 7 May 2012. <http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/electoral-map>.

Universal Healthcare From a Real Doctor's Perspective

  

The debate of universal health care has been running rampant through many campaign attack ads and has been discussed in almost every debate this year. This issue has been spotlighted mainly from a political point of view, thus leaving out a doctor's perspective on how they will be affected. Ron Paul, being an OB doctor offers a very interesting and refreshing perspective with regards to health care. 

Should this bill pass through the Supreme Court, there will be drastic changes in how doctors will treat their patients. Many quite routine procedures may be getting the axe and an estimated 45 procedures will be getting regulated and greatly limited under the new health care legislation. Some of the limitations include breast cancer screenings and E.K.G.s, standard procedures such as these that could save lives will now be regulated by the federal government. Dr. Paul agrees that over testing occurs and that it can definitely be an issue, however it happens due to fear of lawsuits. When someone is admitted to the emergency room, the patient is incessantly tested throughout their visit just to ensure that all bases are covered for fear that should the hospital miss diagnose or overlook an issue, they will be the ones being sued for negligence.

 Dr. Paul's solution is to take the government and the insurance companies out of the equation to eliminate the drastic price increases in medicine and health care, and instead let the health care decisions be between the doctor and their patient. This legislation almost seems to insinuate that the government knows what is [medically] best for patients, when indeed, that is what we are paying doctors for. As Ron Paul made the accusation during his interview:

“The insurance companies are very much in bed with the government. When negotiations in Washington, whether it’s prescription drug programs or health care … the insurance companies are very much involved...It was never thought the Supreme Court was to have control over every piece of legislation. Just look at the power of one Supreme Court justice. One justice can make all the difference in the world on this” (Ron Paul Addresses Government Controlled Health Care, the Dangers of Judicial Review and America’s “Intellectual Revolution”).

Dr. Paul has a long and unwavering libertarian record with regards to his ideology on health care legislation. In 2009, he introduced a legislation that allows a patient and physician to opt out of the electronic medical record system that was set up by the federal government. This legislation protects the privacy of the patient by refusing to release patient's records to a third party. Several other important pieces of legislation that Dr. Paul has voted on includes:

• Supports creating tax credits and deductions for all medical expenses, exempting terminally ill people from paying the employee portion of payroll taxes, providing a payroll deduction to workers who are caring for a spouse, parent or child with a terminal illness.
• Opposes caps on awards in medical liability cases.
• Endorses a new tax credit for "negative outcomes" insurance bought by patients before medical treatment so they can be compensated for medical mistakes. Says it would reduce “the burden of costly malpractice litigation."
• Supports allowing insurers to sell across state lines, as well as association health plans.
• Wants to expand high-deductible health savings accounts (Serafini, 2012).

Many may view Ron Paul's view on health care as heartless, but is it? Is he not abiding by the Constitution? Should the view on health care be black and white or should it be colored gray with the injection of emotion and "doing the moral" thing? I believe that question is the true debate here, and it is a question that will never be answered because it is a very multifaceted issue.  

              

                                                              
                                                                     Works Cited                                     

Paul, Ron, perf. "Ron Paul Addresses Government Controlled Health Care, the Dangers of Judicial Review and America’s “Intellectual Revolution”." Dir. Neil Cavuto. Your World. Fox News: 4/4/2012. Web. 7 May 2012. <http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/04/04/ron-paul-addresses-government-controlled-health-care-the-dangers-of-judicial-review-and-americas-intellectual-revolution/>. 

Serafini, Marilyn. "GOP Presidential Hopefuls: Where They Stand On Health Care ." Kaiser Health News. Kaiser Health, 3/8/2012. Web. 7 May 2012. <http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2011/august/26/gop-candidate-health-care-platforms.asp&xgt;. 

Should Ron Call It Quits?

    As the GOP campaign trail carries on, more and more believe that Ron Paul should just call it quits. In a recent gallup poll, it showed Paul as having only a 9% approval rating and he has only won 71 delegates, compared to Romney's 569 delegates (Volack, 2012). Additionally, 69% view Romney as being the most electable and having the best chance to beat Obama in the Presidential election. This may account for why in a new CNN/ORC poll, 61% are ready to see Paul throw in the towel (Volack, 2012). Paul is quite well aware that his chances of winning are minute, however in a recent press release he stated,
  

 “While other candidates are focused solely on the beauty contests to get the headlines, we’re undertaking a comprehensive strategy that I am confident can lead to the nomination. (Volack, 2012)”

During a recent interview on CNN with Piers Morgan, Morgan asked Paul why he will not just throw in the towel because he is clearly not going to win, in which Paul responded for him to stop with the "silly questions" (Watson, 2012). Paul is not under any false pretenses that he is going to win this election, he understands that the polls and delegates are clearly not in his favor. He however refuses to stop fighting because he believes that he is the only true fiscal conservative of all the GOP candidates. During this heated interview with Piers, Paul finally replied,

“You know, whether it’s up in Maine — or right now we’re doing very well in the state of Washington and North Dakota and excellent now in Nevada. And even Missouri the other day, some really good news came out there for us...Through the process, our people are in the right places. They’re doing the things to become a delegate. So it’s way too soon for you to write anybody off...Besides, just because somebody is in second or third place and — but there’s a race going on. What if Mitt Romney isn’t the best person?...Why should we just throw in the towel because people like you say, ‘Hey, throw in the towel; people don’t want you out there wanting to debate the war and wanting to debate the Federal Reserve and wanting to debate this civil liberties, you know, assassination on American citizens, the military arresting Americans’?”(Watson, 2012)”

Despite that most people are ready to narrow down the race to Romney and Santorum, Ron refuses to call it quits. He is still fighting because he views the other candidates as wanting too much government, too much spending, implement poor foreign policy which we cannot afford, and legislation that is too restrictive with regards to America's freedom. Ron Paul may have a very slim chance at winning, but don't expect him to back down and be silent any time soon. 

                      Works Cited                        

Volack, J. (2012, March 27). Ron paul: 'i am trailing but the race isn't over'. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/ron-paul-i-am-trailing-but-the-race-isnt-over/ 

Volack, J. (2012, March 7). Ron paul's super tuesday hopes dashed but he presses on. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/ron-pauls-super-tuesday-hopes-dashed-but-he-presses-on/ 

Watson, S. (2012, March 27). Ron paul to cnn anchor: ‘stop pestering me with silly questions”. Retrieved from http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-to-cnn-anchor-stop-pestering-me-with-silly-questions/ 

Wanted: Third Party Candidate

    In a Country that is strictly two party politics, is there any room at all for a potential third party candidate to step into the lime light? It is more than just being able to grasp the attention of the constituents, it is the ability to make them get out and vote in your favor. In an election where many wonder if a third party should have stepped up, or perhaps where maybe Ron Paul should have gone third party instead of GOP, the question is, would it have been a successful move?  During a recent MSNBC interview with Mr. Jon Huntsman, he stated,

“We’re going to have problems politically until we get some sort of third party movement or some kind of alternative voice out there that can put forward new ideas...Someone’s going to step up at some point and say we’ve had enough of this...The real issues are not being addressed, and it’s time that we put forward an alternative vision, a bold thinking. We might not win, but we can certainly influence the debate. (Shear, 2012)”

     Many who are interested in a potential third party would agree with Mr. Huntsman. They are aware that the third party are not going to be winning any elections, perhaps they will in the future when people can open their minds to different ideas. Until then, it would be interesting to see a more prominent third party be able to step into the scene and bring new ideas to the table. Many Americans feel as though both parties do not truly stand for their ideals and morals anymore because they are both going to extremes. The third party would be a great go to party because they would not be constrained to a strict political ideology like the Republicans and Democrats are today. There would be much more room for varying ideas without the constraint and restriction the two party model offers.

    According to Professor and third party expert, Ron Rapoport of George Mason University,

"Third parties are successful to the degree which they identify a constituency that isn't being addressed by the two major parties. (Cohen, 2012)"

       Many view the third party as the party that can not only bridge together both the Republicans and the Democrats, but the party that will solve the issues and stand for the common interest of the public good. The issue then is what is public good and common interest? In America, where two parties stand at gridlock and legislative failure is viewed as inevitable, is there even such a thing as a common interest? Ideas vary so vastly and politicians and political parties stand so stubbornly by their party lines, to them and their constituency, public good is what their respective party stands for. Therefore, would a third party even be able to nudge a constituency towards a different ideology? I think not.



      Additionally, many believe that all independent voters who would suddenly run enthusiastically towards a third-party candidate. In actuality, most independent voters tend to lean towards one of the political parties and the number of truly free agent members of the electorate is less than 10%. However, if you consider the severe level of polarization between the two parties, that number may be even smaller (Cohen, 2012).

    In conclusion, though a third party would quite clearly be unable to win, it would give free agents in the independent party someone to vote for. It would offer up differing ideologies and varying solutions to legislation, free of political party constraints. Hopefully in the future there can be a more moderate third party that could save America from its polarizing two party system, which is riddled with extreme politicians in pursuit only of personal agendas. A third party may be able to open a door of opportunity and perhaps provide a glimmer of hope for the future of our political system.






                                                                 Works Cited

Cohen, M. (2012, March 15). Americans elect and the third-party chimera. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/15/americans-elect-third-party-chimera

Shear, M. (2012, February 24). Who might run as a third-party candidate in 2012. Retrieved from http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/who-might-run-as-a-third-party-candidate-in-2012/

Will The Apathetic Youth Be Ron Paul's Demise?

         Ron Paul's campaign pushes on despite only having won 50 delegates thus far on the campaign trail. He came in second with campaign fundraising and is very strongly backed by many independent voters as well as the unwavering support of college aged youth, yet Paul's polls are suffering. Is it perhaps that since Mr. Paul demonstrates a partiality towards Romney, and may end up backing him, that drives people to vote for Romney instead? Are his voters simply passionate and fired up at rallies, yet are not too enthusiastic to get out and vote? At a recent college visit to Michigan State University, 4,000 students attended Mr. Paul's rally, however the following day, only 3,128 voted in his favor. He still has 30 more college campus visits planned for the next couple of months in hopes that this will help his campaign gain more momentum.

     Super Tuesday may hold the clues to prove why Paul's polls are so low. While he has attracted the most youth voters, winning over in Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Iowa, perhaps that was not enough. Polls show that only about 5% of youth voters under the age of 30 actually came out to vote on Super Tuesday. This was a drastic decrease from the 2008 elections. In Ohio this year, only 7% of youth came out to vote compared with the 25% that voted in 2008. Are the youth becoming apathetic about politics or about the GOP candidates? Their lack of enthusiasm towards coming out in voting could easily cost the GOP the Presidency in this election. This suggests that Republicans need to work on their youth support base and not just encourage them to vote, but give them a reason that will make them enthusiastic about voting. In 2008, Mr. Obama has very successfully given the youth a reason to vote by enthralling them with his charisma, youth, hipness, and ability to connect with them. At this time in 2008, Obama had attracted six times as many votes from young people as any of the GOP contestants (Fox, 2012). Perhaps it is Paul's age, 76, that is holding him back from getting votes. All in all, if Ron cannot give them solid encouragement to get out and vote, the youth will end up running back to Obama once again.

                                                                      Works Cited

Fox, L. (2012, March 7). Ron paul not a hit with youth voters on super tuesday. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/03/07/ron-paul-not-a-hit-with-youth-voters-on-super-tuesday 

Oppel, Jr., R. (2012, March 28). Strength and weakness in the campaign of ron paul. Retrieved from http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=931596&f=21

Social Conservatism: The Dividing Factor in the GOP

         One major problem that seems to greatly be dividing the GOP party during this upcoming Presidential election is the differing ideologies on social issues. Ron Paul recently commented on this party division by stating that social conservatism in today's day and age is "...a  losing position...And this whole idea about that talking about the social issues and who is going to pay  for birth control pills, I'm worried about undermining our civil  liberties, the constant wars going on, the debt of $16 trillion and  they are worried about birth control pills and here he [Santorum] wants to, you  know, control people's social lives" (Jeffery, 2012). Paul, sticking true to his libertarian roots, believes that the government needs to completely step out of our lives and to stop controlling and manipulating our social life. This viewpoint, however, is looked down on by many GOP as it is considered too "extreme" to be electable. During the South Carolina debate, Santorum aggressively and ignorantly attacked Paul's pro-life voting record:

"Congressman Paul has a National Right to Life voting record of 50 percent, which is pretty much what Harry Reid’s National Right to Life voting record is. So for — to go out and say that, you know, you’re someone who stands up for the right to life, you repeatedly vote against bills on a federal level to promote the right to life, and you say that this is an individual personal decision or state decision. Life should be protected, and you should have the willingness to stand up on a federal level and any level of government..." (Bearing False Witness, 2012).

       The very meaning of libertarian is the defending of the doctrine of free will, therefore Paul is advocating staying out of citizen's social lives and promoting complete freedom in regards to social issues. Since when has the GOP began to vilify freedom? I think that the Republican party's biggest fault is that it needs to change and evolve with the times. Today's society is significantly more accepting of gay marriage, abortion, the legalization of marijuana, the lowering of the drinking age, ect., than they were twenty or so years ago. As the mindset of the U.S. changes, the GOP need to reevaluate and revise their strategies because otherwise they are setting themselves up to fail and their voting base will diminish. I believe that in order for the GOP to become most successful, they should adopt a more libertarian point of view. By doing so, they would be able to hold on to more power in the government since it would be promoting social freedoms. I think that many Republicans would view that transition as disregarding and discarding their ethics and values, however how is that possible? One can only affect their own ethics and morals when they themselves break away from their believes and perform an act that they consider to be immoral. How does someone else's actions cause another person to suddenly become immoral?

       Another display of division occurred at a meeting in Texas between social conservative leaders as they debated which candidate they were supporting in the upcoming Presidential election. Some of the leaders included the President of the American Values, Gary Bauer, and James Dobson, who is the evangelical Christian that founded the conservative group Focus on the Family.

  "Social conservative leaders have met several times during the nomination battle to compare notes and ideas about various candidates," Bauer said. "Some of those conservative leaders have supported Mitt Romney. Some have supported Newt Gingrich. Some have supported Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum. I believe all of those candidates are exceptionally better to lead this great nation, in contrast to the failed presidency of Barack Obama" (Holland, 2012).

         Based off this statement, it leads me to believe that the candidacy has not only become a competition between which GOP has the strongest social conservative views, but also a fight of which candidate is the best of the worst. With the Republicans being so willing to put any Republican in office, regardless of their qualifications, character, level of leadership, ect., they run the risk of making that candidate a one term President. Should this "best of the worst candidate" fail during his Presidency, then it will cause citizens to want to stray away from Republicans in the 2016 elections, similar to the events of the 2008 Presidential election. The GOP needs to look at candidates in terms of quality rather than in terms of their ability to beat Obama. Simultaneously, they need to adjust their message so that they can gather a wider voting base, rather than just playing to the extreme Conservative constituents. They are indeed setting themselves up to lose unless they change very soon, until then, it will be President Barack Obama in 2012 once again.


                                                           Works Cited

 Holland, Steve. " Social Conservative Leaders Meeting To Try To Coalesce Around Consensus GOP Candidate ." Huffington Post. Huffington Post, January 5, 2012. Web. 22 Feb 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/05/mitt-romney-rick-santorum-social-conservative-meeting_n_1186729.html>.

Jeffery, Terrance. "Ron Paul on Social Conservatism: 'I Think It's a Losing Position'." CNSNews. CNS News, February 19, 2012. Web. 22 Feb 2012. <http://www.google.com/gwt/x?wsc=vb&wsi=3ace9a2c6cc800f7&u=http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ron-paul-social-conservatism-i-think-its-losing-position&ei=DWxFT5PmDZK6wQKO8aGJDA&ct=imb&cd= 3&whp=317>.

 "Bearing False Witness." Liberty vs. Leviathan. N.p., January 22, 2012. Web. 22 Feb 2012. <http://libertyvsleviathan.wordpress.com/>.

Vice President Judge Napolitano?

            As people incessantly crack jokes about Ron Paul because of his "extreme" ideas and his "unelectability", they just cannot seem to take him seriously. To make it worse, Jesse Ventura decides to speak on Paul's behalf during an interview with George Stephanopoulos, “I will tell you this. If Ron Paul runs as an Independent, I will give great consideration to being his running mate” (McCarthy, 2011). However, during a recent speech he suggested that he would greatly consider Judge Andrew Napolitano as a potential Vice President, “One time somebody asked me who I’d have to consider and the name Judge Napolitano jumps right out at me” (Kovacs, 2012). To this the audience was very approving. Perhaps I think that by making public his intentions of who he would fill in particular cabinet positions, such as Vice President, will be advantageous for him. First, it gives the public a glimpse into his potential Presidential cabinet. This is very important because it is not just the President that you are electing, but a whole plethora of other people that will also be playing a role in shaping our Country for the next four or possibly eight years. Judge Napolitano is a very popular candidate and despite having his show, Freedom Watch, recently cancelled from Fox, he still has a very large and dedicated following.                                                                            

             I think that choosing Napolitano is a very wise choice; he has extensive experience with the Judicial system as he was the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of New Jersey, he shares Paul's libertarian perspective, he taught Constitutional law as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall Law School for eleven years, worked as the senior judicial analyst at Fox News, and in 1995 he started his own private law practice (Napolitano, 2011). I think that he has many qualifications that would allow for him to be an ideal candidate as Ron Paul's Vice President. The disclosure of naming a VP will perhaps give more people the sense that Paul is serious about running for Presidency, he is not the joke that everyone seems to take him for. Perhaps if all those who actually said they would vote for him if he was more "electable" actually voted for him then he would have a much better chance of succeeding.

                                                              Works Cited

Kovacs, Joe. "Fox News star to be Ron Paul’s VP?." World Net Daily. World Net Daily, February 21, 2012. Web. 22 Feb 2012. <http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/fox-news-star-to-be-ron-pauls-vp/>.

McCarthy, Kathe. "Vice President Venture?." ABC News. N.p., April 4, 2011. Web. 22 Feb 2012. <http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/04/vice-president-jesse-ventura/>.

 Napolitano, Andrew. "Judge Andrew P. Napolitano: Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst." Judge Andrew P. Napolitano: Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst. Create LLC, 2011. Web. 22 Feb 2012. <http://www.judgenap.com/>. 

Ron Paul Who?

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1009&Itemid=50

This is for all of those who do not quite know who Ron Paul is. I thought that this would be a great way to introduce this blog by providing some background information on this current GOP candidate.