soundstripe.net

I am having trouble finding a direct comparison of the platforms of Ron Paul and Fred Thompson on certain issues. These are two potential Republican candidates that don't get a lot of mainstream press, but are all over the "blogosphere." I decided to put together a little head to head on some of the issues that are important to me.

EDIT: OK Dangers of researching on the Internet. I said that Ron Paul was running as a Libertarian. That was because I was skimming an older article carelessly--he did run as a Libertarian in 1988. Sorry for the confusion.

The candidates appear similar at first glance--both support states' rights and conservative principles (free market economy, lower taxes, etc). Their differences stand out on inspection: national security/foreign policy, and emphasis on fundamental values.

Ron Paul has stood out highly as the Republican candidate who is completely against the War on Terror and the Iraq War. He thinks the military should be almost purely defensive. His focus is on securing the border immediately and pulling our military out of foreign nations as much as possible. His foreign policy is based on strengthening trade and diplomacy relations between us and other nations.

Fred Thompson is at the other extreme, seeming highly militant and wanting a more modern, capable army to be deployed even more widely than it is now. He wants to continue the War on Terror and strengthen America by causing other nations to fear us. Thompson was to create strategic alliances with foreign nations.

The question of values and principles is difficult. It is obvious that no one person shares the values of every American. The duties of a President do not include changing the principles of Americans. I think what is important to Americans is that the President is honorable, just, and upstanding. For me it is important that the President be open to God's leadership, and I am glad that Ron Paul clearly identifies himself as a Protestant Christian. This blogger writes that Ron Paul's Christianity should not make a difference to voters--his duty would be to uphold and protect the Constitution, and he has shown himself able to do that as a Senator. I agree with that position--indeed there is no way for us to see the heart of any man--but the fact that he may be a good example to my children and to all Americans, possible even acting as a witness to God in his position, is heartening.

Fred Thompson seems to be refusing to talk about his faith. He has expressed that he was baptized in the Church of Christ and that is about all. Perhaps he, too, believes that it shouldn't matter to voters, but I would at least like to know where he stands. I like Presidents who are open about their values and beliefs, whatever they are.

Just to make it clear if I haven't already, of these two candidates I prefer Ron Paul. He is more steadfast in holding to his issues and upholding the clear intentions set forth in the Constitution. He is especially strong on the issues that I hold to be most important--the right to life from the time of conception and the importance of traditional families. To me his stance on healthcare, states rights, and tax reform are bonuses.