Comment 17250

By Lynn (registered) | Posted January 17, 2008 at 14:53:03

Yours is the first article I've seen that takes a negative view of Ron Paul without resorting to ad hominem attacks. I intend to look into your reasons why he's not a good candidate for change because, not in spite of, the fact that I support Ron Paul. I don't want to support him blindly. So far, my reasons for supporting him are:

I agree with most, if not all, of his ideas. That's the main reason why most people support a candidate, except for the possibility of supporting a person because of race or gender.

I have seen his voting record, and it supports his campaign platform. Let's face it--most candidates would tell us anything we want to hear in order to get elected. Ron Paul has been called many things, but inconsistent isn't one of them.

He tells the truth. I looked Ron Paul up on FactCheck.org, a non-partisan, non-profit site that aims to provide facts about statements that candidates have made, to help voters see when they are using untrue statements to their advantage. His name is conspicuously missing, except where it is noted that he took part in one debate or another. I couldn't believe that they had nothing on him, so I checked every article with his name. Not one distortion, half-truth, or bold-faced lie. Every other candidate had some fault associated with his or her campaign.

So what's a voter to do? If I really want change, do I go with the people who just tell me they will change things, or do I go with the only one who does what he says he will do and tells the truth?

If you know someone better, by all means, let me know who it is--as I said, I really do want to be an informed voter who makes the best choice.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds