Ron Paul Is Wrong About History

Ron Paul allegedly said in an interview that in dealing with international crises a President should act like President Kennedy during the missile crisis when he picked up the phone and called Khrushchev.

Charles Krauthammer argues that Ron Paul is wrong: Kennedy never picked up the phone to call Khrushchev.

We have to trust Krauthammer. Well, his predictions of the future are always disastrously wrong – for example, his rant about the unelectability of Ron Paul; the news from the Virginia GOP these last days make it clear that only Ron Paul and Mitt Romney can boast any electability, after everyone else lost the chance to compete for a good 10% of the delegates on Super Tuesday. But Krauthammer’s knowledge of history has always been superb. In addition, Krauthammer is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the elitist organization that is so secretive and vague about its true mission and goals, and always has something good to say about more world government and less local government and liberty. They certainly have in their archives such details like whether Kennedy picked up any phone or not; and Krauthammer certainly has access to these archives. So he knows.

He wasn’t allowed to continue his historical lesson, though. If he was, a man of honor and integrity like Krauthammer would have pointed out that Ron Paul was wrong to compare himself to a failed liberal fake hero like Kennedy that can’t show one positive achievement as a President. (Even the missile crisis was resolved in a way convenient to the Communists.) The President that really solved international crises by picking up the phone was no other but Ronald Reagan, a true conservative hero. Krauthammer in his honesty would have pointed out that Ron Paul should have referred to his friend Reagan with whom he shared the same views of foreign policy – non-interventionism, and using liberty and justice at home as an example to the world. Krauthammer would have taught us that it was Reagan who never started new wars – except for two very small and limited operations with almost no loss of American lives – and he ended some of the wars started by his liberal predecessors in office. He would have reminded us that it was the neocon (covert liberal, that is) author Norman Podhoretz who criticized savagely Ronald Reagan for his “softness” toward the Soviet Union, called his foreign policy “scary” and “dangerous,” and declared that Ronald Reagan doesn’t understand the foreign threat to the United States and Israel. Krauthammer would have told us that Reagan preferred to meet the enemy in person instead of sacrificing American soldiers while sitting in his convenient office in Washington DC. He would have also told us that the “evil empire” fell without a single American soldier invading it; entirely by the shrewdness and the wisdom of a President who believed in peace abroad and liberty at home.

In other words, Charles Krauthammer would have shown that Ron Paul doesn’t have to go that far back in history to find a historical example for his policies. Kennedy the liberal democrat is a bad example. Ronald Reagan the conservative hero is Ron Paul’s true example. Ron Paul was wrong about history.

Unfortunately, there is only so much time in an interview. Next time Krauthammer will do better.