Media Dodges Rep. Ron Paul's impact in May 3rd G.O.P. debate.

On Thursday night, May 3rd the crowded field of Republican candidates debated on national television (MSNBC). Among these candidates was Republican Ron Paul of Texas. Dr. Paul is a Vietnam Veteran, medical Doctor, and consistently voted against the war in Iraq on Constitutional and sound foreign policy grounds. The video below is edited to inlcude only Dr. Paul's responses.

Full video of the debate with other candidates' responses

The impact of a true Constitutionalist on the Race and the Debate;

Dr. Paul's impact was apparent in the debates as he distinguished himself from the other candidates by strongly opposing the war and calling for withdrawal of troops, advocating limited government and adherence to the Constitution.

At one point in the debate, Dr. Paul contrasted all of the other candidates on a question regarding the propriety of the "National ID card". After both Romney and Giuliani had answered expressing their praise for the national ID card, Dr. Paul spoke vehemently against it as a violation of "everything about a free society".

When Dr. Paul's response was finished, the candidates who responded after him fell all over themselves to agree with his postion. Both Giuliani and Romney clarified their positions in what was either a manifestation of ignorance of an important policy, or outright decpetive maneuvering by saying they wanted ID cards "only for illegals". Of course, the obvious follow-up question that would have been present in anything resembling actual debate is "how do we give ID cards to illegals that by definition don't even come here through a process which can be regulated?". The national ID card, as proposed and opposed by Dr. Paul is for American Citizens and legal residents, not illegals only. In fact illegals, by definition, would be exempt.

This incident was acknowledged in the National Review Online's overview of the debate by Lisa Schiffren who said;

[Dr. Paul] has always been too principled to be effective. But he is quite intelligent and keeps the field pointed to the true libertarian/conservative north, as he did last night on the issue of national ID cards, which everyone seemed to embrace till he began fulminating, at which point Giuliani and the others “clarified” that the cards were only for aliens.

Unexplained Media Silence

Few mainstream media outlets have acknowledged the huge impact of Dr. Paul on the viewing audience which is readily apparent in the polls after the debates. Some media outlets even went so far as to remove Dr. Paul from the available choices as winner of the debate or declare other candidates to have won the polls despite the clear facts. This has been reported and documented by Alex Wallenwein at Op-Ed News.

Representative Paul won the post-debate polls on the MSNBC web site, CSPAN, and ABC when he was finally included in the options for voting. Is this a manifestation of fear on the part of the mainstream media that Dr. Paul might undercut the Democratic candidate with his strong record having opposed the war? Perhaps is it a manifestation of the influence of the neo-conservative establishment on the media to minimzie Dr. Paul's impact and ensure another moderate neo-conservative candidate.

Whatever the motivation, it is beyond evident at this point that Dr. Paul will not get fair shake in the media and it is also becoming evident that it may not matter. Whether he wins the G.O.P. nomination or not, Dr. Paul will impact the race and may pave the way for a strong run as an independent in lieu of the G.O.P. nomination.

Too Principled to be Effective?

"Too principled to be effective" should be a statement that alarms true conservatives coming from the leading conservative talking-point setter, the National Review. It is the impression of myself, and many who remember, that was Reagan's principles (despite his failure to perform on them, especially domestically) that made him popular with the voters! The G.O.P. would be unwise to ignore that fact.

What Happened to Pragmatism?

Republicans who have favored moderation on key issues have in the past called for a "pragmatic" approach and the necessity of finding "a candidate who can win". In light of those priorities, let's take a hard look at the cold reality of the political situation and why Ron Paul should be considered;

1) The war in Iraq is extremely unpopular and is likely only to become more so before the elections.

2) President Bush has a very low approval rating, and is more likely to be a liabilty by association than an asset in the general election.

3) The Democratic nominee will be very likely to be a member of Congress who voted for the 2002 authorization of force and has offered only token and opportunistic opposition since.

Given these considerations, the G.O.P. would be well-served to nominate a candidate who is on record having opposed the war, and who has a strong track record having opposed the Bush administration. Despite this, his record on every conservative issue will prevent him from alienating the base of the party which could happen if he were opposing the war from a "moderate" viewpoint. If political trends continue, Ron Paul may in fact be the only Republican with a chance to win in the general election.

What is the priority for Republicans?

The deciding question is shaping up to be this: "What priority will have the most impact on the Republicans' desision of their candidate?" Will it be the pragmatic desire to maintain the Oval office, loyalty to the neo-conservative agenda or adherence to conservative principles? Two of the three favor Ron Paul.

This may be the last "thread" of a chance to restore a semblance of Constitutional operation to our government and have a resurgence of the understanding and love of liberty in these United States. If you would like to see Dr. Paul elected, please help us by doing the following;

1) Become active in the Republican Party in support of Dr. Paul, as a delegate if possible.. even if you had left the party in disgust (as I did years ago).

2) Make Dr. Paul's name visible (signs, bumper stickers, etc.) including by visibly letting others know about his VOTE in opposition to the war which is very unpopular now.

3) Call in to conservative talk radio shows to remind fellow conservatives what limited government and the Constitution mean, and ask them to support Dr. Paul. Also, remind them that the war is very unpopular as is President Bush and if the G.O.P. wants to be "pragmatic" they should look seriously at a very conservative candidate with a track record opposing both Bush and the war. Nnational shows make this difficult with screening, but local shows it is very easy to do.

4) Talk to your friends and family about Dr. Paul and about his key positions.

5) Send some of the following links to your whole email address book;

Rep. Ron Paul's answers from the Republican Debate May 3rd:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peBGJwE9NXo

Rep. Ron Paul's written weekly reports from Congress, outlining his positions on issues:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

FILM: America: Freedom to Fascism by Aaron Russo. This film features interviews with Dr. Paul and covers in a very basic and riveting way the issues that make Dr. Paul's candidacy so critical right now:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsZO6G7dfpI