Ron Paul has some good ideas regarding the financial background that drives this nation.
His foreign policy ideas aren’t worth considering. I listened to his “Ignore Iran and it will go away” policy the other night, and it was clear that his idea was unworkable. He did not believe in acknowledging a real and present threat.
His plan was the same as Europe’s prior to Hitler.
His defense of Iran based on a CIA takedown of a previous Iranian government and the installing of the Shah, ignores so much history.
The “democratic” Iran taken down was preparing to nationalize the oil industry of Iran. This was by a man who had seen to the rise of a Shah who was deposed in 1941 for his ties to Hitler. President Eisenhower, no friend of former friends of the Nazis, especially those talking of nationalizing oil, approved the CIA takedown of Mossadeq(?) and replacing him with the SON of the Shah Mossadeq had supported. It seemed a fair compromise at the time. It was probably also punishment for questionable associations with Nazis leading up to WWII.
In Ron Paul’s mind, Iran deserves a pass because the CIA overthrew their government in the early 1950’s. What he doesn’t acknowledge is that it probably prevented a Venezualan type socialist state.
In my opinion, Ron Paul has more in common with our forefathers than any Presidential candidate that I have listened to in the past 20 years. Whether he’s talking about the central bank, fiat currency, or “foreign entanglements”, his positions are consistent with the positions of our forefathers. I’ll have no problem voting for him or Michele Bachmann. That being said, I was not at all displeased with the Iowa straw poll results yesterday. It was a good day for conservatism.