Ron Paul is not the only anti-war choice

January 05, 2012

Contrary to Mary Meehan's assertion ("Ron Paul — the only choice for anti-war voters," Jan. 2), Ron Paul is not necessarily the best and certainly not the only option for anti-war voters. Indeed in the past three presidential elections, the Green Party USA has fielded candidates who have opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and have supported full repeal of the Patriot Act.

The Greens' 2012 presidential candidate will no doubt maintain similar positions when he or she is nominated at the party's national convention here in Baltimore this summer. Through its hard won ballot access in all 50 states, the Green Party can give national voice not only to ant-war voters but to those who seek a real alternative to the entrenched policies of the Democratic and Republican parties.

Ron Paul's anti-war position is refreshing. However it reflects his overall disdain for a centralized federal government, including an isolationist foreign policy and for a domestic policy that offers no restraints upon corporate greed, deception and corruption. Support for the Occupy Movement demonstrates that the public is in no mood for Mr. Paul's laissez-faire, 19th century approach to today's problems.

The Green Party has, on the other hand, not only endorsed the Occupy Movement but has long given attention to the dangerous disparity between rich and poor and the excessive influence of corporate power upon our lives.

If Ms. Meehan wishes to support anti-war, anti-empire and anti-torture candidates who likewise seek economic justice, she should look far beyond Ron Paul.

Irwin Fried, Baltimore

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.