But hiding out and keeping quiet scarcely befits theleader of a movement of would-be revolutionarieswhich means that, sooner orlater, Dr. Paul will have to speak up again. Even if he has settled the civilrights controversy for the moment, he still has some explaining to do.
As a lifelong libertarian who seems stuck on astrict standard of ideological purity, he may or may not espouse that creed'smost extreme positions, like his father, Rep. Ron Paul. If he does, then evenmany Republicans may think twice or three times before they vote for him. If hedoesn't, then he may find himself in a quarrel with many of his old comrades,his father and his own past statements. More than once, Randhas said that he generally agrees with Ron.
So considering Paul's background, extremism is areasonable concernand the only way to find out what he really believes is forhim to start answering a lot of questions.
At the Mercy of Fate, Corporations andEconomic Cycles
What do libertarians believe? On some issues, suchas abortion, they are divided. But on gun control, for instance, thelibertarian platform indicates that they believe in no restrictions whatsoeveron gun ownership, no registrations or background checksin short, no statutoryor regulatory effort to prevent convicted criminals, registered sex offenders,suspected terrorists, illegal immigrants or anyone else from getting theirhands on firearms, including anything from a 9mm to a missile launcher.
Some Americans may not consider such absolutism tobe loony, but very few would favor abolishing all background checks or all ofthe existing restrictions on automatic weapons.
What voters in Kentucky and elsewhere will learn, when theylook more deeply into the movement from which Paul emerged, is thatlibertarians believe in very little government. They seem to feel that the kindof state suited to the 18th century would serve America just as well today. So theywould do away with all legal restrictions on wages, hours and workingconditions, including the minimum wage and the ban on child labor. If your bossrefused to pay you at the end of the week, the government would do nothingandyou would have to sue.
Under a libertarian regime, every protection thatmodern Americans take for granted would disappear, leaving us to the mercy offate, corporations and economic cycles.
No more laws stopping air and water pollution, nomore regulation of food and agricultural safety, no controls on advertisingcigarettes or alcohol to children. (The libertarian society would be paradisefor E. coli bacteria, the oil industry and Joe Camel.) No more Social Security,Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, public schools, national or state parks, orfarm subsidies of any kind; no more federal support for scientific researchinto clean energy or curing cancer or AIDS or any other disease; and, in fact,no more federal money for education at any level, from Head Start to statecolleges, universities and graduate schools.
Is this the "message" Paul is bringing usfrom the great minds of the tea party? Maybe so, if they mean what they sayabout balancing the budget without raising taxes. But for Paul, there is atleast one exception to the hard-core dogma. You see, he is against cuttingMedicare payments to physiciansat least while he's still practicingophthalmology. He should explain that, too.
%uFFFD 2010 Creators.com
