Booker Rising: "The Real Problem With Ron Paul"

There is a petition afloat - which was emailed to me two days ago by some group - to pressure the Republican National Committee to keep Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) out of future Republican presidential debates. Why? Rep. Paul doesn't support an interventionist approach in U.S. foreign policy. The libertarian Republican's comments about 9/11 and the war in Iraq have riled conservative Republicans. I am an independent - I voted in the Democratic primary last year, and in last year's general election gave 58% of my ballot to Republican candidates and 42% to Democratic candidates - but I will defend Rep. Paul's right to be at the debates. Yet another arena of his views is not being highlighted enough.

However, while I agree with Rep. Paul on most issues - especially economics - on libertarian grounds, I am no fan of his. Where the real focus of critics ought to be is on Rep. Paul's problematic views on civil rights. His position on the Civil Rights Act - which he outrageously asserts did not enhance individual liberty - is morally repugnant. Two years ago, I argued why the Act instead has libertarian roots and reiterated these points when Rep. Paul appeared in the debates.

Because his views regarding 9/11 and the war in Iraq, Rep. Paul is getting particularly slammed on the FOX News Channel. Michelle Malkin, who is an analyst for the cable network, stated: "And I'm glad that this moment [during the last Republican presidential debate] provided great TV for FOX News — it was a very instructive exchange — but Ron Paul really has no business being on stage as a legitimate representative of Republicans, because the 9/11 truth virus is something that infects only a very small proportion of people that would identify themselves as conservative or Republican."

Despite Ms. Malkin's, Rep. Paul has a right to be at the Republican presidential debates. He is a legitimate representative of Republicans: not conservative Republicans but many libertarian Republicans. More importantly, he is an elected official serving in the U.S. Congress. Conservative Republicans who oppose his views on the war in Iraq or other U.S. foreign policy matters should debate his views, not try to drive him from the public square. Meanwhile, there is little focus on past racial comments by Rep. Paul or in newsletters under his control. Where is the accountability there, as this is much more problematic than his foreign policy views? This is in part why the Republican Party has trouble getting more black votes.