Matt Johnson

*Originally published in Political Fiber, May 4, 2012

I just paid a visit to Ron Paul’s official campaign website. Under the “ISSUES” heading, “NATIONAL DEFENSE” is listed right before “END THE FED.” Curious as I am about Ron Paul’s rabid aversion to effective monetary policy, I clicked on the former.

Under a dashing, uniformed picture of “the doctor,” I found a reassuring subheading which read, “PROVEN LEADERSHIP.” Under this promise rests a quotation, which reads, “Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense: As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”

It’s a mouthful of ravishing, sweeping praise from none other than…President Ronald Reagan?

Yes, the Ronald Reagan who authorized American military involvement in Granada, oversaw covert wars in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua, provided funds, training, intelligence, and equipment to Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War (resources later used to commit genocide and initially distributed for a pointless aggression war that stacked up over a million dead bodies), and approved the sale of weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages in Lebanon. This is the president who Ron Paul wants to brand as an ally?

Unsurprisingly, the pioneering, anti-establishment libertarian and indefatigable champion of freedom is also a transparent opportunist. Dr. Paul may wallow in his reputation as a weed-legalizing, war-ending, economy-saving dissenter, but he still knows how to hug the party line and snatch up a few undecided votes when the need arises.

On May 10, 1988, Ron Paul told The Los Angeles Times, “The American people have never reached this point of disgust with politicians before. I want to totally dissociate myself from the Reagan Administration.” His wasn’t a slow process of disillusionment with the Reagan era, either.

In a 1987 interview with The Christian Science Monitor, Dr. Paul stated, “Ronald Reagan has given us a deficit 10 times greater than what we had with the Democrats.” He went on to admit, “It didn’t take more than a month after 1981, to realize there would be no changes.”

How can a man with seemingly bottomless contempt for Ronald Reagan advertise his name as a supporter and appeal to his judgment? Perhaps some feckless campaign staffer just made a mistake on his website. Surely Dr. Paul wouldn’t so flagrantly and repeatedly compromise his deepest convictions.

His campaign arraigned Rick Perry for trying to “undo the Reagan revolution” while entreating voters to support “the one who stood with Reagan.” Apparently, Dr. Paul was supporting the “Reagan revolution” by expressing his disgust with it and promising a lack of commitment to its precedents. Considering the obvious new direction they’re taking, Dr. Paul’s campaign should adopt a new slogan – conventional and boldly contradictory: Ron Paul 2012.

Let’s take a closer look at one of the staggering inconsistencies in Dr. Paul’s rhetoric.

He broadcasts Reagan’s enthusiastic endorsement at the top of his national defense page. However, Dr. Paul was quite clear about his stance toward the Reagan Doctrine in 1987, “Knowing this administration’s record, I wasn’t surprised by its Libyan disinformation campaign, Israeli-Iranian arms-for-hostages swap, or illegal funding of the Contras. All this has contributed to my disenchantment with the Republican Party, and helped me make up my mind.” And what had he decided to do? Leave the GOP for the greener pastures of stagnant libertarianism.

Dr. Paul’s invocation of Reagan’s “support” for his foreign policy is worse than disingenuous – it’s insulting. A moment’s research would reveal Dr. Paul’s visceral disdain for President Reagan in the late-1980s, but his campaign must assume that no one will bother.

Has Ron Paul simply undergone a political transformation since 1988? As any of his supporters will tell you, absolutely not. He’s a candidate who prides himself in steadfast consistency. However, the most striking problem with Dr. Paul’s feigned embrace of Reagan isn’t adequately encapsulated above. The whole of the Reagan Doctrine is at odds with every single precept of Dr. Paul’s foreign policy. The two have radically divergent views on the employment of American power, the role of international institutions, and the economic realities of the modern world.

Reagan’s prestige is simply a political tool – one Dr. Paul is happy to utilize.

At this point, the balance sheet doesn’t look good for Ron Paul. If you’re a Democrat, he’s tied himself to a name you probably despise. If you’re a Republican, he just thinks you’re an idiot. And if you’re an independent, he’s proven himself to be a shameless hypocrite who is willing to shed his principles at the mere whiff of a few extra votes.