By Matt Rooney | August 30, 2008


Assemblyman Michael Doherty is right about many things, but Ron Paul is certainly not one of them.

Doherty said he'll need to reserve judgment on Palin until he learns where she stands on foreign policy. “I don’t know what she brings to the table regarding that issue. We’ll have to see. But that’s the issue that has a long of us Republicans shaking our heads and wondering what’s the real agenda here. Is it really in the national security interests of the U.S.,” said Doherty, who has concerns about the U.S.’s involvement in the Russian/Georgian conflict. “If I vote for McCain, it will be holding my nose. It will just be more of the same and contrary to why I supported Ron Paul to begin with. People may mock me and say I’m crazy, but you know what, people are coming around to that way of thinking.”

Doherty is wrong on three counts:

1) Sarah Palin has more executive experience than McCain, Biden and Obama combined. She is not a simple country bumpkin and, with all due respect to the Assemblyman, she has probably accrued more foreign policy experience than either he, Ron Paul or Barack Obama. Alaska is not a barren tundra exclusively populated by icebergs and harbor seals. The Governor of Alaska is a quasi-oil executive, obliged to participate in the ultra-complex geo-politics associated with the global energy industry active in Alaska. Sarah Palin has visited other nations, held talks with foreign leaders and executives, and probably has a firmer grasp on the state of the global economy than our own New Jersey governor.

The uninformed, knee-jerk criticism of Governor Palin is little more than standard yuppie elitism. Furthermore, any political observer who sees no notable differences between McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden is either a liar or in self-denial. Palin is the genuine article: a working class mother who rose to the top by fighting corruption and out-of-control spending. Do Ron Paul's groupies, I wonder, object to Palin out of genuine ideological concern or jealous spite? And doesn't this pick validate Senator McCain's laudable conservative priorities for the GOP's future?

Disciples of the Church of Ron Paul slander Palin at the risk of discrediting themselves.

2) Ron Paul's antiquated isolationism would harm America and, not that the media is paying attention, Paul's backward ideas on foreign policy are currently being disproved.

3) Ron Paul is self-serving and obnoxious. Did Dr. Paul expect to seriously affect the Republican platform, win the GOP nomination or start a successful third party movement? No.

Did Ron Paul raise millions of dollars online, including untold amounts from from smut-peddlers, and spend none of it to help the conservative candidate defeat radical liberals? Yes.

Do Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, and other GOP-rejects continue to rack-up invites to cable news shows only because they are willing to criticize President Bush? Yes.

Make no mistake about it- the Ron Paul "Revolution" had little to do with shrinking big government and everything to do with growing the Ron Paul brand. For example, Ron Paul rails against earmark spending but has no problem forwarding his constituents pork requests to the appropriate House committee. He votes against the bill to save face, but the result had been hundred of millions of taxpayer dollars being re-allocated to his rural Texas district. What a selfless crusader, huh?


Mike Doherty has some good points on a variety of issues. Therefore, it would be a terrible shame if that good work was overshadowed by his participation in the election of Obama-Biden. Tell me there's no difference between the two parties, Assemblyman, when we're sharing needles at government health care clinic and paying 60% of our paycheck to the government.