Alternative conservative rock-star Congressman Ron Paul is known for two things, his die-hard free-market fundamentalism and his staunch opposition to foreign entanglement and government abuse of individual rights.
He is one of few Republicans to enjoy support from anti-war elements of the electorate, and stands firm against torture and indefinite detention in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba as part of the “War on Terror”, frequently describing these practices as illegal.
At the same time, his stance on economic policy takes the concept that the market knows best to an illogical extreme. If he had his way, he would shut down the Department of Education, which he sees as a socialist organization.
This would be a tough give and take for someone who wants to see progress in America and a stronger middle class but also wants the rule of law to be restored and the foreign invasions to end, but even if Ron Paul were, for example, President, he would have to make compromises on that agenda.
In a hypothetical situation, if Ron Paul had to choose between free-market capitalism and anti-fascism, which would he choose? Looking at his two children in the political arena, the Tea Party and Senate candidate from Kentucky Rand Paul, it appears that Ron Paul is more likely to associate himself with red-baiting fearmongers than with peace activists. There is a split in the Tea Party between people who believe in Ron Paul’s anti-war stance and Sarah Palin’s tough-talking, throw-the-rules-out-the-window position, but Rand Paul appears to be bridging that gap. On his website, he says that terrorists need to be tried in military tribunals at “Gitmo” and says that, “… the primary Constitutional function of the federal government is national defense,” a talking point Sarah Palin made during her address at the National Tea Party Convention.
With Rand Paul and the Tea Party, you get all the free-market fundamentalism with none of that bothersome anti-imperialism. I wonder if Ron Paul is proud.