View source for Ron Paul: Why So Many Conservatives Hate Him

On February 12, 2011, Ron Paul won the annual CPAC straw poll for a second time. The announcement was met with a mixture of cheers and boos.  The veteran congressman from Texas has been in the national public debate for quite some time now. Known for his beliefs in small government, opposition to the Federal Reserve, and elimination of the federal income tax and the IRS, he stood out as different from the rest during the 2008 Republican primary. As the only anti-war candidate on stage at these debates, he was the only candidate that I can remember who actually elicited jeers from some of the crowd after speaking.

Even I have to admit that I find Ron Paul interesting and appealing. His supporters are passionate, vocal, and are willing to speak with their wallets. During the last Presidential election season, I found it interesting that even at some of the most liberal universities in the country, you could see students holding his signs and advertising his cause with the same fervor as their liberal counterparts would hold their "Obama" signs. The "Ron Paul Revolution" signs where everywhere! What makes Ron Paul so interesting? What makes him interesting is also what makes many mainstream conservatives hate him.

First, Ron Paul is strictly anti-war. He has an "isolationist" philosophy that believes that the United States should choose to not intervene in world issues that do not directly affect our country. He was an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, as well as the war in Afghanistan. To this day, he is trying to end the war in Afghanistan, an idea that is much more popular now than it has ever been before.

His opposition to war appears at times to be more about the costs of war and less about the human toll or the rights of other nations, but this should not be a surprise to anyone.  [http://ronpaul2012.com Ron Paul]  is if nothing else one of the most fiscally conservative modern politicians. All wars result in borrowing money from other nations for funding, and Congressman Paul has stood firm in his opposition to adding to the national debt to fight wars. Clearly, any neo-con who likes war and "spreading democracy" as part of their platform would abhor Mr. Paul.

Another reason why Ron Paul is so disliked by some conservatives is because of his stance on social issues. While he is strongly pro-life and in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, he has repeatedly stated that he believes the federal government should be out of the abortion issue. "We don't need a federal abortion police," Paul once said. It is clear the Paul does not support a federal ban on abortion, which could anger many of the strongest supporters of the rights of the unborn.

Due to his anti-federalism philosophy,  [http://ronpaul2012.com Congressman Paul] believes that marriage is a religious institution and that the federal government should not dictate who marries who. He has repeatedly said he would not support a Constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. This has angered many of the religious right, as well as other social conservatives, who believe the federal government should step in to "protect traditional marriage." This issue could be one of the major ones that will continue to prevent Paul from being a serious 2012 presidential candidate.

Ron Paul also wants to do away with the "War on Drugs." He claims that this has been a costly government bureaucracy that has only served to increase crime, and not prevent it. Part of this seems to be his libertarian streak, where people should be allowed to do what they wish with their bodies, so long as it is not hurting anyone else. But when you look a little deeper, it's easy to see Paul's fiscal conservatism shining through. He looks at the War on Drugs as another wasteful and massive government spending program. He sees that it puts some non-violent offenders into the jail and prison systems, where taxpayers have to fund their housing and basic needs. This issue has angered many conservatives that I know personally, who feel that we need even stricter penalties for those who use and sell illicit drugs.

While certainly not the last issue that offends many conservatives, Ron Paul has repeatedly defended the earmark process, saying that it leads to more transparency in fund allocation and ultimately less federal government intervention. Both Republicans and Democrats alike have been critical of earmarks in the news lately. Earmarks, at times, seemed to be the main issue of John McCain's failed 2008 Presidential run. Paul's insistence that earmark elimination would not save any money has aggravated those on the left and the right. ( http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/earmark-reform/ )

Ron Paul will continue to be a divisive figure within the Republican Party for a long time to come. But even his harshest of critics should recognize that he has been pivotal in increasing the awareness for the need of national discussion on the issues of taxes, trade, and the wastes of the federal government. There is little doubt that Paul will once again run for President in 2012, and while I may never claim to cast my support, I more than look forward to hearing his dissenting voice at the Republican primary debates.

Source of information: http://www.ronpaul.com