Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) says he would consider putting the liberal congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) in his Cabinet if he were to win the presidency in 2012.
Paul said his libertarian political philosophy helps him connect with some on the far left — including Kucinich, who shares Paul’s general anti-war stance.
Paul joked that if he brought the Ohio congressman aboard in his administration, he might have to create a "Department of Peace."
"You've got to give credit to people who think," he said.
"Being pragmatic is about forming coalitions," Paul said at a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. "I probably work with coalitions better than the other candidates. I don't think I've said anything negative here about the president."
Paul’s bid for the GOP nomination has yet to catch fire, though he enjoys perhaps the most passionate following in all of politics. He has had difficulty elevating himself to the top tier of candidates and complained that the media is not taking his campaign seriously.
But the congressman said he’s playing the long game, and values bringing political change over winning the presidency.
"Politics doesn't drive me as much as economic policy," Paul said. "We're in a big mess, personal liberty is under attack."
Paul said his presidential campaign is more about an "educational effort" of libertarian philosophies than a reflection of his personal ambition.
The congressman said the fact that other Republican candidates are talking about the Federal Reserve or rolling back entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare are victories for his campaign. Paul also says his campaign — coupled with a financial crisis that has brought into question the stability of the American economic system — is changing the prevailing attitudes of voters.
"It requires a lot more education and a lot more inroads," Paul said. "But absolutely, I think the whole country has come this way."
But Paul continues to struggle in the polls, hovering around 9 to 10 percent of likely Republican primary voters. While his showing is consistently better than some candidates who have garnered more attention, he is unsure of how he will propel himself to the top of the field.
"The supporters believe it's possible, I don't know," Paul said. "There's no reason to rule out the fact this can explode. Something has to give here."
Paul attributed some of the problem to the media, arguing that significant campaign milestones and rallies were underreported. And he acknowledged that as a candidate, he is responsible for delivering his message in a way that voters can appreciate.
"It partially is my fault, and I think that's what I work on most, refining my message," Paul said.
But Paul rejected the idea that he should adopt a more pragmatic or conciliatory strategy that would enable him to either grow his base among those skeptical of some of his views — particularly in terms of non-interventionist foreign policy — or achieve smaller pieces of his domestic policy goals legislatively.
"If you give up your principles, you're not being very pragmatic," Paul said.
There are two books that tell about Ron Paul accurately, in his own words. I have heard many criticisms of Congressman Paul, but never that he lies, and very rarely that he votes contrary to the Constitution.
The first book, assembled by my friend Phil Haddad, is becoming hard to get, and called "Ron Paul Speaks"
The second, by Paul himself, "Liberty Defined", rather a new book.
What I read in this article is a snippet, something most of you would rail against if were done to your candidate. If you want good government, I suggest you read Liberty Defined, though if you prefer comic books it will be very difficult for you.
Mostly I suggest turning off your TV and hitting the streets. With that, I assume you really have a full grasp of the Penn experiment, which was later adapted to become the American Experiment. Understand if you love liberty, you love anarchy. Not the nasty kind, but the Christian kind. Our founders chose a Republic form of government because it was as close to anarchy as they dared, allowing for our sinful nature. Even so, even many non Christians among them said if this nation ceased to be "christian", freedom would cease.
Hit the streets with a plan. Your plan is your target. Adjust your target as necessary. Read the Art of War, and Gorilla Marketing. Find out who will vote correctly, and give them a ride to the polls, or make sure they have an absentee ballot.
Honestly, it frightens me how poorly informed my friends on the site are. That is until I remember that God is able. That said, do not forget Hosea ch 4, especially verse 6, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge". It will interfere with earning a living, and many of the pleasures we all like. It has cost me dearly.
I suggest that you meet with someone before you slander them through hear say. He didn't make the remark to make our soldiers miserable overseas in the heat....he made the remark to say.....they shouldn't be there in the first place! It isn't or ever will be a war that we will win, it's politics as usual! Paul was also in the military, he DOES support the troops, but he doesn't support the war....there is the BIG difference. I don't support the murderous wars, for what? When OUR country needs our troops HOME to protect.... and yes, I do definitely support our troops, attend rallies, carry signs, chant, take truck loads to them and get the word out. BUT I do protest the needless war mongers who are killing our troops needlessly. THEY SHOULD BE HOME!! Look at his votes, investigate, don't go on what was in the far past. If you want to slander....go to his site, check out what is stated, look at his votes and find something substantial..period If you don't have time...ask someone at one of your meetings to investigate! Thank you for your input also.
Thomas, you're statement... "Understand if you love liberty, you love anarchy. Not the nasty kind, but the Christian kind." - is accurate only in the strictist context. Unfortunately we are far, far from the ideal example of Liberty... and anarchy is completely out of the question!
We're living in a very dynamic world that demands our participation on many levels. If we expect to survive 'on the streets', we need some 'street smarts'. That means we must understand our enemies and live in a state of preparedness. There might be skirmishes and scuffles, but we must work to avoid any violent encounters. Our World might not survive another 'World War'! Violence is not the answer.
And, Denise is right on the money!
I like you, have been very disappointed with the behavior of some 'libertarians'. And, like you, I have come to question their integrity and purpose.
No, Mr. Paul is not the answer to our problems. As I said earlier, he is UNELECTABLE.
We need a clear thinking candidate without all the baggage.
Twana, I don't have enough duct tape or aluminum foil to protect myself.
Have you ever met Dennis and his wife?
I got a ticket at a Tea Party rally in front of his office for blocking traffic. It was taped so I could have fought it. Not worth my time.
You think he's bad? Meet his wife. Talk about two loons...