Ron Paul

If you read a lot of political writing (like I do), if the online story allows for reader comments, it usually doesn't take too long before the Ron Paul supporters start flooding the comments with their opinions about how Paul is the only electable Republican for President and how the MSM is suppressing him and his message. I always seek out the Liberty Caucus booth at the Texas Republican State Convention, and I am somewhat libertarian leaning, but I don't support Ron Paul's Presidential campaign.

Why?

Partly because despite his devotees' insistence to the contrary, he would be crushed in November 2008.

Mainly, however, because we don't need one Ron Paul in the White House. What we need is about 218 of them in the House of Representatives. Fifty-one in the Senate would be nice, too. We need serious, dedicated Constitutionalists in Congress. Right now, we have a handful. If we accept that a candidate could not get the endorsement of the Liberty Caucus without being mostly right on the Constitution, we have about 20 members of the House of Representatives who fit the bill.

The Ron Paulites remind me quite a bit of the Constitution Party folks. They want the White House, but they would be better off working toward electing candidates to lower offices. That would lay the groundwork for a President down the road.