Rangeley
09-10-2008, 11:10 PM
Okay, he should have gone to the press conference. In the very least, he shouldn't have committed to going, and then backed out of it at the last second. Clearly, Ron Paul didn't know he wasn't coming - he was still waiting for him when he was up talking. This was poorly handled on Barr's side, regardless of the legitimacy of his reasoning.
Barr should not have publicly asked, in the way he did, for Ron Paul to join his ticket at this point. It should have been something done in private, and going public the way he did just strikes me as incredibly immature. He tried to drive a wedge - hoping to get the people who were disappointed Ron Paul didnt run third party to his side and maybe pressure Paul into joining him. He is focused on his campaign, all his chips are into this election. Paul has a different set of priorities.
And that is why anyone here who was disappointed when he didn't accept the offer, or that he isn't running third party, should have known better. Ron Paul has been clear that he believes working within the Republican party - within the system - is the best way to get things done. He wouldn't be where he is today if not for the fact he ran in the Republican primary. Theres a reason the Libertarian party has been so eager to get him on board with them, and it's not because he ran in 1988 as their candidate.
Paul views the third party bids of Barr, Baldwin, Nader, and McKinney as tools to show that a significant portion of this country rejects what the two main parties stand for. Or, at least, they can be tools if they do well. But they are only tools, not the ends - them doing well will help reform the Republican party by helping to show they no longer represent where America is at.
Clearly, Barr is focused on the short term, Paul on the long term. Barr wants immediate results, Paul wants lasting results. That's why, at least in my opinion, Barr tried to drive this wedge issue onto us, disregarding the longer term strategy Ron Paul is employing. It's a disagreement over approaches.
Ultimately, I suppose, it's up for all of us to decide which approach you are going to take. You can sit around feeling all disappointed that Ron Paul isn't running third party, maybe even throw around labels like "passive" and "just a good guy." You can keep your focus on November, and judge success or failure exclusively by the number of votes the person you eventually support gets. Or you can focus on the long term, getting involved at the lower levels and working your way up through the system. You can stay involved, stay active - use the results of this election, whatever they might be, to your benefit. You can spread the word and grow the movement so that for the next election, and the one after that, and the one after that, we will have exponentially larger influence and ability to change America for the better.
We know which path Ron Paul is taking.
Barr should not have publicly asked, in the way he did, for Ron Paul to join his ticket at this point. It should have been something done in private, and going public the way he did just strikes me as incredibly immature. He tried to drive a wedge - hoping to get the people who were disappointed Ron Paul didnt run third party to his side and maybe pressure Paul into joining him. He is focused on his campaign, all his chips are into this election. Paul has a different set of priorities.
And that is why anyone here who was disappointed when he didn't accept the offer, or that he isn't running third party, should have known better. Ron Paul has been clear that he believes working within the Republican party - within the system - is the best way to get things done. He wouldn't be where he is today if not for the fact he ran in the Republican primary. Theres a reason the Libertarian party has been so eager to get him on board with them, and it's not because he ran in 1988 as their candidate.
Paul views the third party bids of Barr, Baldwin, Nader, and McKinney as tools to show that a significant portion of this country rejects what the two main parties stand for. Or, at least, they can be tools if they do well. But they are only tools, not the ends - them doing well will help reform the Republican party by helping to show they no longer represent where America is at.
Clearly, Barr is focused on the short term, Paul on the long term. Barr wants immediate results, Paul wants lasting results. That's why, at least in my opinion, Barr tried to drive this wedge issue onto us, disregarding the longer term strategy Ron Paul is employing. It's a disagreement over approaches.
Ultimately, I suppose, it's up for all of us to decide which approach you are going to take. You can sit around feeling all disappointed that Ron Paul isn't running third party, maybe even throw around labels like "passive" and "just a good guy." You can keep your focus on November, and judge success or failure exclusively by the number of votes the person you eventually support gets. Or you can focus on the long term, getting involved at the lower levels and working your way up through the system. You can stay involved, stay active - use the results of this election, whatever they might be, to your benefit. You can spread the word and grow the movement so that for the next election, and the one after that, and the one after that, we will have exponentially larger influence and ability to change America for the better.
We know which path Ron Paul is taking.