“I agree to this Constitution with all its faults … and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.”
- Benjamin Franklin

This was a common view amongst the Founding generation – that any government will work for a time and ultimately must end in corruption. We are not far from Franklin’s prediction – if indeed we have not already arrived. This is why Ron Paul is the right candidate for President.

Ron Paul represents everything that this country is supposed to be. He stands for the Republic as it once was and should be again. His mission as Jefferson once described his own: to put this country back on “her republican tack.” That’s republican with a small “r” – not the party platform.

It’s very easy for opponents to dismiss Paul as “a great candidate for the 19th century” and that should tell you something. The other chaff running for President pretty much universally hold the American people and the Constitution in contempt. They stand for the ruling class and the status quo. Paul is the exception.

The fundamental concept of this government is liberty, the love of which is “interwoven … with every ligament of your hearts” as Washington so eloquently put it. Ron Paul’s campaign represents this concept in its purest form. He is the only candidate that truly understands the words Liberty and Republic.

In business, they teach you that vision is the most important driving force behind any organization. It is the binding concept that enables members of the organization to understand how to act in an unforseen circumstance. Further, it indicates to those members what moral or organizational blueprint they should expect their leaders to follow.

If you think about it, this is really the most important criteria when considering a vote for President. Does it matter what Hillary’s health care plan looks like? By the time it comes out of Congress it will be chopped up, beat up, chewed up and spit out in some completely unrecognizable format (which is the best American can hope for if she does get elected, but I digress). The plan is not nearly as important as how Hillary will react to situations and circumstances that confront her when the plan is torn to pieces in Congress. The more important question: what is the moral and intellectual framework in place that guides her decision making process? Can anyone answer that question – about any of the other candidates?

Hillary is a conservative. Again, I’m not speaking of conservative as the extreme right wing of the Republican party. I mean, she represents the system as it is and the interests of the establishment as they currently stand. So do Giuliani, Romney, McCain, Edwards, etc… These are conservatives who represent the ruling class. They are interested in maintaining an open stream of wealth from your pockets to theirs, and there is virtually no difference between the two parties from this perspective. Bill Clinton recently spoke of his wife as “an agent of change” which is of course absurd. He did however have a point – that the best candidate will represent true change and the conviction to drive that change in the face of the status quo. Ability (rather than conviction) is the word Clinton focused on but first of all, his wife has demonstrated none. Second and far more important – she and the other candidates have demonstrated that whatever abilities they do possess, those skills will be devoted towards preserving their own wealth and power. That’s conservatism, plain and simple.

Ron Paul’s vision is easy to identify: liberty. This is the guiding concept driving his candidacy. He is interested in freedom and his vision of government is an institution put in place to nurture and protect that freedom. This vision is far from quaint. The ideas of republicanism and natural rights have a long and distinguished intellectual history. They have been discussed and expounded upon by minds far greater than any that you can find today smugly dismissing the Paul campaign as some fringe candidate on Meet the Press. Government is not a new concept and the best and most ethical means of executing it have not changed because of computers, fighter jets or global warming.

Personally, I think Paul is wrong about the Iraq war and the war on terror. That is a hugely important issue – certainly the most important international issue facing this country since the Berlin Wall came down. Global warming, our “prestige” around the globe, the United Nations, etc… all of these are of no importance. However, what good is defending our freedoms if there will soon be none left to defend? As important as our international peril is – our domestic peril is greater. Ron Paul may be the only person who can fix it.