Ron Paul is too crazy to be President

As a libertarian-leaning conservative, I’ve been exulting over the recent successes of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign. It seems like every time I post something on Facebook or Twitter about Ron Paul, however, someone mentions that Ron Paul is “crazy.” I decided to look into the matter, issue by issue, and I was shocked to find just how crazy Ron Paul really is. Observe:

Position: Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard.

Actually, Paul isn’t particularly enamored of gold, but he does believe that money should be backed by some sort of hard asset, as the U.S. dollar was before 1973.

Why this is crazy:

Money is not supposed to be based on anything. A dollar is worth a dollar because people believe it is worth a dollar, and that belief shouldn’t be rooted in anything other than trust that the Fed won’t print vast amounts of money, drastically devaluing the dollar.

Also, if the dollar was based on something, it would prevent the Fed from printing vast amounts of money to bailout banks, as it has done over the past three years.

Ron Paul wants to “end the Fed.”

Ron Paul wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve, the organization that oversees U.S. monetary policy. This position goes along with #1. If money was based on hard assets, the Fed would have nothing to do. An intern named Dave would simply print as much money as the U.S. has in gold reserves and then go home.

Why this is crazy:

It’s important to have a central agency comprised of wealthy, unelected bankers overseeing the banking industry and the economy as a whole. Without such an agency, banks would act in wildly irresponsible ways, potentially crashing the economy and causing widespread financial losses and unemployment.

Position: Ron Paul won’t attack Iran.

Ron Paul doesn’t want to engage in preemptive wars against countries that may pose some future security risk to the U.S., like Iran.

Why this is crazy:

This sort of policy would have prevented our cost-effective, humane and wildly successful adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those countries would not be the paragons of stability and democracy that they are today, and the U.S. might have turned into a police state where basic civil liberties are routinely violated in the name of combatting terrorism.

Position: Ron Paul wants to cut $1 trillion from the federal budget.

Ron Paul wants to make massive spending cuts, eliminating the Education, Energy, Commerce, Interior and Housing and Urban Development departments.

Why this is crazy:

Without a central federal bureaucracy telling teachers how to do their jobs, America could easily fall behind many other industrialized countries in the quality of its public education – countries like South Korea, Finland, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, Australia, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Estonia, Switzerland, Poland and Iceland. And most of these countries are no larger than a good-size U.S. state like New York or Minnesota. Can you imagine New York or Minnesota overseeing their own education system without the help of Washington. Two words: Cray zee.

Without the Department of Energy, we might become dangerously dependent on foreign oil while failing to invest in more sensible renewable energy sources, and states like California might experience routine blackouts as their strained electrical grids buckled under demand.

Without the Department of Commerce, we could see a big dropoff in whatever it is that the Department of Commerce is supposed to be doing. Without a Department of the Interior, we might need a whole other agency to protect the environment (maybe call it the “Environmental Protection Agency”). And without a Department of Housing and Urban Development, we could see massive over-building of overpriced homes while hundreds of thousands are homeless.

Clearly we cannot afford that sort of insanity.