The final Presidential candidate we will be rating on the Paul-O-Meter is the Green Party’s nominee, Cynthia McKinney. For a description of the Paul-O-Meter see this article. We have previously completed ratings for John McCain, Barack Obama, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and Ralph Nader.
It is now Ralph Nader’s turn to be viewed through the Ron Paul colored glasses of the Paul-O-Meter. The Paul-O-Meter rates the candidates on how closely they resemble Ron Paul on the issues. For a complete description and methodology of the Paul-O-Meter please see this article. Thus far we have rated Barack Obama, John McCain, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin.
UPDATE: Chuck Baldwin’s Communications Director posted a comment clarifying his position on a few of the issues. This has modified Baldwin’s overall score. Read the comments for more details.
It is now Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin’s turn to be spun through the Paul-O-Meter. So far we have rated Barack Obama, John McCain, and Bob Barr. Will Chuck Baldwin beat Bob Barr’s current high score of 88? Read on to find out.
It is now Libertarian candidate Bob Barr’s turn to be spun through the Paul-O-Meter. We rate the candidates on 20 criteria to see how closely they match up with Ron Paul on the issues. Thus far we have rated Barack Obama and John McCain. Read all about the Paul-O-Meter here.
In the next installment of our Ron Paul Paul-O-Meter effort to rate the Presidential candidates we hold John McCain to the Ron Paul liberty fire. Previously, we rated Barack Obama. For details about the Paul-O-Meter see the description.
Today we begin rating the Presidential candidates with our rating for Barack Obama. The Paul-O-Meter will give us a total score on 20 criteria. The closer a candidate gets to 100 points the more that candidate is like Ron Paul. For each criteria we will give the score and a short justification for that score. Read the results for Barack Obama below.
Who needs a Ron Paul endorsement when you have the Paul-O-Meter?
Everyone knows the perfection of Ron Paul. He is already a living legend. All future candidates are damaged goods simply because they are not Ron Paul. There is only one Ron Paul. So to see how other candidates measure up to his perfection we are introducing the “Paul-O-Meter”.
The Paul-O-Meter ranks candidates on a scale from 0 to 100 depending on how closely they are in agreement with Ron Paul on chosen criteria. Since no candidate can possibly equal Ron Paul, the highest score on the Paul-O-Meter attainable for candidates other than Ron Paul is 99. To simplify the ranking, each candidate will be graded from 1 to 5 on each of the 20 criteria. The 20 criteria are listed below, along with a short description for each.
NEW: Now you can submit your own ratings using our new Paul-O-Meter web polling service. Check it out here.
Walter E. Williams has been one of my favorite columnists over the years. Anytime I open up one of his columns I salivate for the contents. His latest column is another good one. This article finds Williams, as usual, effectively arguing against government intervention in our lives. Here is an excerpt.
Right now Congress tells each American how much should be set aside out of his weekly paycheck for retirement. How can they have the information to know what’s the best use for the $70, or so, taken from you and put into Social Security? Might you benefit more by saving that money to start a business, purchase tutoring lessons for your children, or putting it in a private retirement plan? Unlike congressional control of traffic signals and supermarkets, the effects of Social Security aren’t apparent because we don’t have the information about what people would have been able to accomplish if they were able to keep more of their earnings.
You might argue that saving for retirement is important, but so is saving for a home or your children’s education. Would you want Congress to force us to put money aside for a home or our children’s education?
Here is the 6 part (full hour) interview of Glenn Beck interviewing Bob Barr from tonight (06/06/2008). Good stuff. Note that without the commercials it is not a full hour.
Vern McKinley is challenging incumbent Frank Wolf in a Republican primary next Tuesday, June 10th in Virginia’s 10th congressional district. I live in this district and have heard some seriously scary things about Frank Wolf. I will not repeat them because I have no proof, instead I will try to focus on the issues where he and Mr. McKinley differ.
Vern McKinley is a principled Reagan Republican. I’m talking about the Reagan running for office, not the Reagan who forgot about cutting spending as well as cutting taxes. I suppose his Congress could be blamed for that. Frank Wolf used to be a Reagan Republican. He even ran supporting term limits in 1980. Almost 28 years have passed and he is still in office. Wolf, from the very beginning couldn’t keep a campaign promise.
On to the issues. If an issue is not listed it means that both McKinley and Wolf generally agree on the issue with a bit of room for differences in the margins. The point is to show where the candidates truly have a different world view.
Earmarks (AKA “bringing home the bacon”): Wolf likes to tout his SAFE commission, which is yet another Wolf investigative committee like he has proposed so many times in the past without much to show for it. The idea is to “examine” earmarking and figure out methods to curb it. This, in my view, is an establishment politician trying to have his cake and eat it too. It looks good on paper, but why did Wolf propose and get over $200 million in federal money in earmarks last year? Just another sly Wolf-like move, I guess. I hope people are paying attention this time.
McKinley on the other hand is almost running his entire campaign on “earmark” reform. He rightly criticizes Wolf on earmarks, saying that states shouldn’t use the federal government as an ATM machine. Funds for local projects should be raised locally. There’s some true federalism for ya. Bravo Vern.
Grades: Wolf gets an ‘F’ for being a shyster. McKinley gets an ‘A’.