I like Ron Paul. The Texas congressman is often described as “cranky” or even “nuts.” But because he has no chance of winning and therefore nothing to lose, he is providing some refreshing truth-telling in the GOP presidential debates.
At times Tuesday night, he sounded like the only sane, honest person on the stage — and the only real conservative. Paul invoked conservative icons such as Robert Taft to argue that the party’s conservative roots lie in a noninterventionist foreign policy and small federal government.
He was the only one to pledge to abolish federal agencies — three of them! — Homeland Security, Education and Transportation.
He reminded everyone that candidate George W. Bush promised America wouldn’t be the world’s policeman or engage in foolish nation-building projects. Remember?
He noted that conservative hero Ronald Reagan had the good sense to get our troops out of Lebanon when he realized that Middle East politics were, well, crazy.
His most impolitic comment of the night was to argue that the Sept. 11 terrorists attacked America because of our foreign policy interventions in the Middle East. His point was awkwardly expressed, implying American guilt — a no-no. But he was correct that it was the presence of U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia that enraged Osama bin Laden and set him on the path of jihad, as amply documented in the Sept. 11 commission’s report.
Other candidates and party officials have been quick to attack Paul and suggest he should drop out. Even that he might be cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.
But he said things that some Republicans didn’t want to hear but needed to, if they’re serious about debating the future of their party and conservatism.
And I think his honesty is striking a chord with many viewers. He came in a close second in the Fox News post-debate poll — and won outright in the MSNBC phone poll after the first GOP debate.
What did you think of his performance, bloggers?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Phantom on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- Phantom on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
83 Comments
Ron Paul is so conservative he’s liberal… I love it!
Ron Paul’s chances are a lot better than people give him credit for. He has already moved into fourth place in a Zogby poll in New Hampshire, and ranked sixth in first-quarter fundraising, not the long-shot the press makes him out to be.
His debate performance might have been better or more diplomatic, but it certainly made the media splash a second-tier candidate needs to get noticed. His website traffic and donations are going through the roof right now.
Ron Paul really brings what the republican party is all about to the debates without being influenced by the global corporations.
I was really impressed by Congressman Ron Paul’s comments in the South Carolina debate. He was knowledgeable, principled, wise, and courageous. His dedication to the US Constitution is truly needed now. I think he is America’s best hope for peace, prosperity and liberty. He has my support and vote.
I agree with the comments above. Dr. Ron Paul is not only an honest man, but a defender of our constitution.
If we do not choose Ron Paul now, we may never have another chance to save our Republic from Globalist interests.
I do think Ron Paul has a chance, especially if Republicans realize that being pro-war is unpopular. Since Paul, unlike Clinton and company, actually VOTED against the war, he could get a lot of the independant voters that went to the left in 06. Personally, as a conservative, I can’t stand any of the “top tier” (why doesn’t the media simply use the word “popular”?). Giuliani has skeletons in his closet, and Romney and McCaine have already been pegged as flip floppers. Ron Paul’s the best chance we’ve got.
I have followed Ron Paul over the years since the mid-90’s via his op-ed’s, speeches and congressional record. All that material speaks for itself and it is a very clear and consistent message. I have no doubts as to his character because I have a had a long time to take measure of his character by simple observation.
In the past I supported only one person in a presidential bid, and that man was the late Harry Browne. Now, Ron Paul has brought me back hope, it’s a small hope, but I am enjoying it while it lasts.
My family had never heard of Ron Paul before, so I “forced” a few You-Tube videos on them, and they were shocked by the honesty of this man. The honesty is apparent, and Paul explains his positions in straight language.
The mainstream media had left us with no clue about Ron Paul’s candidacy. But after 4-5 videos of debates, interviews and speeches, our outlook completely changed concerning what a candidate for president could be like.
My mother, my sister and myself will all be voting for Ron Paul.
And, it will not be a wasted vote.Ron Paul stands alone.
A logical Republican, he doesn’t have a chance in hell. They’ll feed him to the crocs.
Paul is an interesting person whose convictions on worn on his shirt sleeve. He’s often identified as a Taft type clone in his foreign policy as almost isolation and foreign intervention by arbitration rather than invasion.
Being an OB-GYN Doc, he is a Pro Lifer and has strong, informed opinion on what life is.
On taxes, he is very Libertarian in his views. He wants to eliminate the IRS, Social Security and basically any tax that delivers a cradle to grave concept. I’m sure he would support a flat tax if he could push it into Congress.
Not really a classic Isolationist in trade, but he has very restrictive ideas on what the U.S. should be doing in trade and what it shouldn’t be doing (NAFTA, More Tariffs.)
He’s a lot more affable in person as he reminds people of their friendly family Physician, which is what he really is.
A supporter of the military would be questionably incomplete. My best guess is that under Paul the military would be reduced to a bare defense type of military, with very little offensive options.
He would do away with Department of Education, Homeland Security and most likely put deep gouges in agencies like the CIA, NSA and DIA.
He believes more in control at the State Level than the National Level, although he is not a State’s Rights purist.
Paul would probably fit in as a Jeffersonian type of Politician in the early 19th century. He would stick out like a sore thumb in the Lincoln era.
He doesn’t believe in subsidies of any kind, so would not be popular with the current agricultural base.
If you like a faint voice from Washington, then Paul is your candidate. If you want help from the Federal Government that the States can’t seem to manage on their own, then Paul isn’t your candidate.
my god I can’t open this page cause they probably yanked it ..but now were a “propaganda” posse ..but remember we don’t exist! also I only voted once on the MSN and Drudge poll. Hell I wouldn’t even give a penny for a fox poll! text msg b.s. (pay rupert-think not) and he/we still won!
Capitol Hill Blue Ron Paul’s propaganda posse and spam squadCapitol Hill Blue, VA – 5 hours agoRon Paul’s propaganda posse is working overtime, generating emails wanting to know why this web site is not wasting more of its valuable space and bandwidth …
Not so fast! We face 40K Russian nukes and not to mention the crazy stans and Iran/Israil/PAK/Inida .. I see Pres. Paul keeping our defense but a sane foreign policy. Don’t worry the MIC is going no were. Just kept in check
“A supporter of the military would be questionably incomplete. My best guess is that under Paul the military would be reduced to a bare defense type of military, with very little offensive options.”
Ron Paul is not a bad guy, but I don’t think he stands a chance if he can’t grow a backbone. Coming from a Libertarian angle, he wants to be anti-war in most cases, but he’s running into too many contradictions there.
He’s very conservative in his outlook of social programs, and that’s where he shines – but I don’t think he’ll get the nomination.
In fact, we need a stand out pretty soon, or we’re going to be disappointed with our limited choices.
But that’s just me.
I don’t like any conservatives- real, fake or otherwise. I am a LIBERAL (except on those few issues in which I am conservative) and I am not ashamed of that. But I will say this- although I do not like “real” conservatives, I do at least have a degree of respect for them unlike the fake neo cons that are running the country now. I do not agree with George Will but I respect him. Bill Kristol I cannot stand. And Paul is right about 9/11 whether you want to believe him or not. The USA needs to exit the Middle East. We do not have any business putting ourselves in the middle of the Muslim Holy Land (Saudi Arabia) and then thumbing our noses at a billion Muslims. Of course they are going to be pissed off and if it was not Ben Laden and 9-11 it would have been some other group and something else. The neo cons believe that, somehow God has given the United States the duty to police the world (and extract from it whatever we want and leaving the leftovers for the other 95% of the people who live on the planet). Other nations and other people are, frankly sick of it and have decided that they don’t have to take it anymore. Not only the Muslims but the Chinese, the Russians, the Indians and even the Europeans have said “enough alredy, it is OUR turn now” and if the USA does not learn that we can no longer boss the world around with a stick and consume its resources way out of line with our population (like oil), we are indeed in for a very sad future.
“A supporter of the military would be questionably incomplete. My best guess is that under Paul the military would be reduced to a bare defense type of military, with very little offensive options.”
Which is exactly what our military should be. It should exist to defend the United States. The job of world policeman belongs to the UN- not us. Now, if the UN decides that it has to intervene- such as in Kosovo- I have no problem with contributing troops, money and equipment to ensure the success of that mission. But the US military should only be used to defend the United States. All foreign military bases should be closed and turned over the U.N.
People seem to be responding to Paul’s message, which indicates that voters want to see a change in the way our government approaches foreign policy. Even if Paul seems a bit unrealistic in his approach, the front-runners do not make sense, either, with their tough guy talk about war, especially in regard to the Middle East. Too many unforseen and uncontrollable forces tend to be at play in that region. In any case, Rudy G’s quick response and demand for a retraction of Paul’s comments, though quick and perhaps politically astute in some ways, smacked of predictability. There was something phony about it and I didn’t really buy it as an authentic move on Guiliani’s part. He was playing to the crowd. Big deal. When you get right down to it, Rudy and the rest are promoting a line that all we have to do is keep on with the current strategy, be tough because “I’m tough, baby,” and all will be well. Maybe people recognize that it will take a shrewd and talented politician to navigate the waters and that swagger and bravado are not all that brilliant when you think about it. The Democrats do it as well, though they do it for a different reason. Republicans do it because they’re “hawks” and “hawks” are supposed to be tough. Democrats do it because they’re “doves” and “doves” have to prove how tough they can be to overcome the “hawks” in debate. Codswallop.
At any rate, Paul’s message does connect with a certain type of voter. You recognize that spending is out of control and there is a sense that the federal government needs to be reined in on many fronts. Perhaps Paul will serve the purpose of forcing Republicans to reconsider the status quo. They would be wise to do so. They need more balance on foreign policy, a little less bravado and a bit more acumen. If FDR and Churchill are the models, then you want an understated toughness and great strategy, wheels within wheels. Thumping the podium and declaiming about Bin Laden doesn’t really get you all that much. It’s insulting to voters that politicians seem to think we’re that stupid.
Unfortunately, the GOP front-runners have already been up on TV talking the other way, so they run the risk of being called a “flip-flopper” if they abandon the hard-ass strategy. The annoyingly simplistic “flip-flopper” terminology should be discarded immediately. Let’s do what’s right for the country.
Finally some posters said the truth: Ron Paul is a libertarian! His web site says as much: “Official web site for libertarian congressman Ron Paul.” (Notice the small “l.”)
Libertarian does not equal conservative. Not by a long shot.
For example, in 2001 he wrote to explain why the way on drugs should be ended: “We have promoted a foolish and very expensive domestic war on drugs for more than 30 years. It has done no good whatsoever.” Are there any other conservatives who believe this?
Anyone that believes that America deserved to be attacked, and is at fault for 9-11 should have “STUPID” tatooed on their forehead. And Ron Paul should be the first person in line. Any one that believes what he said is true is most likely an America hater. He will never be elected, he’s a terrorists best friend.
Good grief!
“Anyone that believes that America deserved to be attacked, and is at fault for 9-11 should have “STUPID” tatooed on their forehead.”
Jay, please post where Ron Paul, or any candidate said THAT!!
Over the top much?
Nice try, we are amused, and we do encourage you to try again.
Now Jay
“Anyone that believes that America deserved to be attacked ….. ”
That’s not exactly what he said is it?
simplyifying – paraphrasing what he said :
MUSLIM EXTREMISTS BELIEVED America should be attacked because we were meeddling in their affairs …..
.. he never said nor implied we deserved to be attacked ….. Rudy (one trick pony) G. (and now you) twisted his comment in front of an adoring audience
Ron Paul is a real man, not like the bloviated, reptiliean-minded Rudi. All the other waffling buffoons on stage on merely surrogates interested in wielding dominate power, not constitutional government.
Ron Paul has won every post debate poll, including Faux News poll and MSNBC poll. the powers that be a scared shitless and will smear Ron Paul relentlessly and try to destroy him.
Run time: 03:57http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvrrPCkHKLw
A little linky to what Ron Paul REALLY said.
If Ron Paul can’t win, then America can’t win.
Some have speculated that Ron Paul “win” in the recent debate was made by an organized call-in of “Paul” folks. I think a CNN news anchor brought it up.
The problem with a weak military that is defensive only is that you remove all tactical options if it is needed. For instance, long range bombers, transport aircraft, transport ships and the support infrastructure in general.
This type of siege mentality went out with the Castles in Europe and the Maginot line in WWI.
Ron is SECOND in fundraising in NH above Rudy and John McCain.
In the FOX cell poll, which you cannot fudge, he was ahead of Rudy’s 18% and John’s 4%.
He has a huge contingent here, and the reason he has so much less money is corporate money is refused….
Makes you wonder who owns Hillary and Mitt and Obama eh?
“But because he has no chance of winning and therefore nothing to lose, he is providing some refreshing truth-telling in the GOP presidential debates.”
I disagree. He tells the truth because that is what he does, always. When he ran for Congress, he told farmers he would not vote for subsidies, and explained why. He got elected anyway.
Ron Paul spoke truth to power. He dared stand up to the conventional assortment of liars.
How ironic these Republicans that don’t like Ron Paul when it is crystal clear that this man was the only true conservative on the stage that night.
But rather than hearing about Ron Paul and his ideas, the news soundbite for the evening was tired ole’ Huckabee making fun of John Edwards’ haircut. Now you wonder why our country is in such sad shape?
It doesn’t matter if you are Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, we all want freedom, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
That is why I’m voting for him. My vote won’t be wasted even if he doesn’t win.
How ironic Democratic eye rollers don’t know the difference between a Libertarian and a conservative.
Some will never see beyond their labels they attach to everyone and everything.
What the majority of the Americans do know is that George W. Bush, who professed to be a Compassionate Conservative, has led our country down the wrong path for the last 6 years. And to make things worse, he has told quite a few mis-truths, otherwise known as lies, while he did it.
It looks like GWB has made being a conservative a dirty word.
The vast majority of Americans want nothing to do with the so-called Iraq “war” yet their government is powerless to stop it.
Ron Paul reminds us that that is not representative government.
Dennis Kucinich?
This discussion is silly, imo.
Here’s the thing. The GOP is linked irrevocably to Augustus Stupidus, aka GW Bush. Discussing Paul as if what he’d “do” as POTUS is moot because the Democrats will win in 2008.
I’m not sure many of you get it. Mark my words, you who do not: Bush has ALREADY dragged your party to the ash heap of history. If the GOP doesn’t find a way to hobble Bush till 11/09 — and if their 2008 candidate doesn’t go to some herculean lengths to disavow Bush’s presidency (assuming this is even possible at this late date) — then there won’t be a Republican president until 2016 – at the very soonest.
I don’t think the GOP base will allow Bush to be either sidelined or repudiated (for instance, see the base’s response to Giuliani’s defense of Bush in the recent debate) (see also the enthusiastic and loud embrace of American torture, ibid). The current anatomy of the GOP’s roots (Reagan Democrats and evangelicals as drones, Wall Street as the queen bee) has been poisoned, paralyzed really, by the toxic rhetoric of the Bush presidency and how its aggregate affect on the paranoid tendencies of the conservative personality type.
Americans are tired of seeing the Executive being run by the equivalent of Col. Flagg, the paranoid intelligence officer in the old tv series M*A*S*H.
It can get worse, too. The national GOP is finished if the current immigration bill passes and is signed by Bush. In that case we won’t see a Republic president for another decade or two, at the earliest.
Nice post Pedant…Too bad it had nothing to do with the thread topic.
That’s what most Americans don’t like about Democrats, they can’t keep on topic.
What’s silly is not interjecting Ron Paul’s America for the candidates to fumble with.
Giuliani nearly jumped out of his skin when Ron Paul correctly pointed out that American foreign policy { Israel } was the root cause of Middle East trouble-making.
The world seems to grasp what Giuliani fails to notice.
“That’s what most Americans don’t like about Democrats”
How soon as koolaid drinking Republican forgets that the Democrats are now the majority.
Actually no about the middle east topic, Paul is absolutely wrong.
The U.S. was invited by the King of Saudi Arabia. If you want to include Al Qaeda as part of the power structure in Saudi Arabia then the premise is correct.
The U.S. has been in Saudi Arabia for decades. We’ve supplied them with military equipment and support for decades. In the First Gulf War we utilized their bases and eventually set up permanent location there.
It was the Al Qaeda Islamic Terrorists that object to us being there, not the Principles in S.A.
Since when do we concede to what terrorists demand?
Or is that the stance for the appeasers?
The attack on 9/11 was by a separatist group. This would be like bowing down to the IRA just because we would put a base in Ireland at the invitation of the Irish.
That analogy of appeasement by Paul is just plain stupid, morally bankrupt and wrong.
I’ve had a theory for a long time that the Presidency isn’t about policy, or even politics, as much as it’s about the nation’s self-image.
Theodore Roosevelt was young, assertive, like America at the turn of the 20th Century. He could’ve been the first three-term President but the Republic Party was bothered by TR’s activism — the FDA, the national park system, internationalism… — and they wanted a nostalgic return to the Gilded Age; and so they got Taft.
Woodrow Wilson ascended to the presidency in a three-way race (much like Clinton did in 1992). And a minority of intellectuals got their man in. “He kept us out of War!” worked in 1916… until it didn’t in 1917. And internationalism took the fall in 1920 when the most un-intellectual ’til George WMD Bush took over. Just like Shrub, Harding was an amiable idiot surrounded by crooks.
Prohibition created a zeitgeist where all laws were suspect. Cal Coolidge did nothing and that’s exactly what people wanted from government.
The ironic tragedy of Herbert Hoover was the country expecting more nothing-ness from the government. Hoover was (until Carter) the most skilled technocrat ever elected President. But the impotent presidency he inherited from Harding and Coolidge kept him from doing what needed to be done when the natural consequences of unbridled capitalism.
America in 1932 wanted hope. FDR offered hope. The Great Depression of the 1930s was world-wide. Musolini offered his solution in Italy, Franco did the same in Spain, Hitler in Germany. FDR had a different approach; an *American* approach that brought people together. “The only thing we have to fear is…fear itself!” The only thing Musolini and Franco and Hitler had was… fear.
By 1940 fear had taken over most of the world. People didn’t want to trust anyone but FDR with World War raging again in Europe and Asia. The same approach to battle Franklin Delano Roosevelt approached the Depression worked as America won WWII. Harry Truman won in 1948 because he was everyman… the “True Man,” if you will… the same kind of people who’d lived through the Depression and won World War II.
Americans were weary of fighting in 1952. We wanted to bask in the afterglow of our victories and Eisenhower was the symbol of that.
We’ve learned since that communism was a house of cards, a paper tiger… effective only when it “conquered” war-decimated Eastern Europe and and co-opted post colonial Asia and Africa. But at the time Americans wanted leadership back, idealism back, the best and the brightest. JFK seemed to personify the kind of America Americans wanted to be.
The Bay of Pigs was a last-ditch effort of Republics trying to get up on their hind legs and persuade everyone that communists were more than they claimed to be. (They weren’t, of course. As we learned later.)
Lyndon Johnson was the symbol of America in 1963. Idealism had been shot down. We’d been thrust back into reality. LBJ’s reality was (like Taft before him) rooted in old party aspirations. A New Deal Democrat, Johnson wanted to be FDR II; solve economic injustice and win American respect overseas. His opponents weren’t the threat to civilization that Hitler and Mussolini and Franco were in the 30s, but he treated them as such.
America voted for Richard Nixon’s “Secret Plan to End the Vietnam War” in 1968. But, as Reagan and Shrub used abortion later in the century, Nixon wanted the issue more than he wanted the solution to the problem. Four years of killing off more than half of all Americans lost to Vietnam, Nixon played the “surrender” card and won by a landslide. There’s an old story about the 1960 election; that Joe Kennedy bouht JFK’s victory…but he wasn’t gonna pay for a landslide.
Nixon in 1972 spent the constitution and American blood to win a landslide. Gerald Ford became president because he was a useful idiot.
America wanted some honesty in 1976. Jimmy Carter wasn’t big enough for the job but at least he was honest. He got defeated because LBJ’s and Nixon’s war debts came due. Carter happened to be the guy on the job when fundamentalist Muslims and nationalists started resenting American arrogance. And if there’s anything in the world Americans are good at it’s arrogance.
That was Carter’s fatal flaw. Ronald Reagan tapped American arrogance and treated the Federal Treasury like a Visa card that never sends bills.
George HW Bush inherited the Reagan fantasy about the time the Visa card bills started to arrive. “No new taxes,” he lied. Republic Party fantasists never forgave him for facing them with the truth.
In 1992, Ross Perot was the the last authentic conservative to run for president. Like 1912, the three-way race empowered an intellectual to win the presidency.
Americans tend to hate the smartest guy in the room. Bill Clinton was the kind of guy who’d remind teacher she hadn’t assigned homework yet, a minute before the class bell rang for Christmas vacation. Republics hate intellectuals. Intellectuals tend to be right so often, countering the myths, fantasies, and lies that Republicanism depends on.
George WMD Bush ascended to the presidency due to a success of finely-tuned corruption. The scandals historians will write about for years about Shrub is not how his administration *broke* the law, but how the Republics manipulated the law to make their crimes technically “legal.”
The Shrub Administration is a reflection of American people who look for every loophole, ply every nuance of law and what’s right, for personal gain.
Maybe the 2008 election will reflect a tidal shift in what Americans believe about themselves.
Are corporations more important than individuals? Is “the American way of life” so precious we should try to impose it at the point of a gun anywhere and everywhere in the world? Are we as a people rich enough, and blessed enough, to expect “the least of these my bretheren” to get basic healthcare? Is life in the 21st Century really a trade-off between American pints of blood for barrels of Middle Eastern oil? (And, if so, exactly what proportions are you advocating?)
Barak Obama offers hope. Hillary Clinton offers technical expertise. John Edwards offers unity. John McCain offers… I dunno, non-traditional-Republicanism? Rudy Giuliani offers… a new sheriff in town? Mitt Romney offers a guy who’ll tell us what we want to hear?
Ron Paul might offer the truth.
Golly, Americans aren’t ready for that.
Ron Paul believes that volcanoes are a contributing factor to global warming?
‘Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter’http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11638“Human emissions of CO2 are now estimated to be 26.4 Gt per year, up from 23.5 Gt in the 1990s, according to an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report in February 2007 (pdf format). Disturbances to the land – through deforestation and agriculture, for instance – also contribute roughly 5.9 Gt per year….Total emissions from volcanoes on land are estimated to average just 0.3 Gt of CO2 each year – about a hundredth of human emissions…”
Not to mention that humans cannot stop volcanoes…
“Not to mention that humans cannot stop volcanoes”
Speak for yourself…”The Mighty Ed”
Ron Paul is quite simply the last best hope that centrist Republicans have of taking the party back to its roots and away from the G.W. Bush/Ann Coulter/Karl Rove neocons.
If the Republicans don’t want him — let him rest quite assured; we Libertarians want him – -back!!
There is one factor in this topic that we are all forgetting. George W. is still knocking on Iran’s door and trying to pick a fight. Wasn’t it Dick Cheney just recently on a warship just outside of Iran talking about how evil Iran is?
No matter who wins the GOP nomination, Bush and his cronies are just itching to start the fight with Iran. If the rest of the Republicans let their emperor Georgie follow through with this insane plan, then all hell will break loose and it won’t really matter who gets the nomination or not- will it?
I think, ultimately, the biggest immediate challenge will be to counter the growing hysteria that many Americans feel about people in the Middle East.
More and more, I am hearing statements concerning “Islamo-Fascism” and even more disturbing there seems to be a trend to make this out to be a Holy War.
Once we go the route of making this out to be a war of good versus evil, all rational talk pretty much goes out the window. We become exactly like the most extreme fanatics on the other side.
It’s very much what Nazi Germany did in regard to those that weren’t “racially pure”. Once you write of a whole segment of humanity as evil, the only thing to do is kill them all. I find this unreasoning line of thinking becoming part of our American psyche. Americans truly believe that we have a cultural war that requires the complete destruction of the opposing side.
The Battle Cry: We must destroy Islamo-Fascists (or Krauts, Nips, Gooks) because they are evil and hate everything we stand for… The refrain is always the same, only the label changes, we never seem to learn. There’s a line we cross taking us from defending, warding and protecting and into a blind beserker rage wanting blood.
If there is “Islamo Fascism” then there is surely American Fascism as well. I think the extremes on both side are playing off each other in some strange symbiosis. The hatred here is equally matched over there, but where is reason? Is reason so rare?
It is such irrational hatred that will be the hardest opposition to getting Ron Paul’s message of reason out.
Too many, already, have bought into GW’s Crusade and are marching off to a mindless ideological war.
If the GOP could be banished from the Preisency and Congress for the next 30 years, I will be happy. I am 49 and figure I won’t have to put up with them and my kids will be old enough by then to defend themselves from the evil cabal. The Republicans should become what they are- racist right wing extremeist that represent only a small amount of southern states. Much like the Democrats used to be prior to the 1960s.
To the author,
Thanks for writing about Ron Paul. In case you have not seen the recent coverage of Ron Paul on ‘The View’ and Bill Maher’s show, I suggest looking them up. The Ron Paul campaign seems to be running along quite smoothly and by all indicators other than the talking heads of MSM he is indeed a top-tier candidate with as much of a chance of winning as anyone.
Again, thank you for writing about Ron Paul. I hope to see more of such in the future. Have a great day.
Ron Paul’s chances of winning the Republican nomination? ZERO!
There needs to be some context relative to Ron Paul’s comments regarding the attacks of 9/11.
Understanding why al Qaeda attacked us does not assign blame to the US, anymore than understanding that an addict mugged you for money to support his habit.
Flip the equation and consider what our reaction would be if Muslims set up a base in the Vatican or the Chinese built military bases in Canada and Mexico.
America can no longer do what we want in the world without regard for the consequences. Truthfully, we never could, it is just now that the stakes have become higher and the “enemy” more organized and intent on making us pay for our “indiscretions.”
The Republicans will scream that I am blaming America first – which is obviously not true – but that is usually their first entry in the debate.
We need to step back and look at our actions throughout the world. We may be able to win all the battles militarily, but in the end, we will lose the war for the minds and hearts of the world.
Our approach should be the hearts and minds. History tells us that the military victories come with a high price – a price that we may not want to pay.
Ron Paul is clearly the enemy of oligarchial collectivism. Oppose Big Brother. Vote for Ron Paul 2008
The Marines have a saying, “If you get them by the nuts their hearts and minds will follow.”
The Marines have a saying, “If you get them by the nuts their hearts and minds will follow.”Posted by: Hank Price | May 19, 2007 at 07:27 PM
Equivalent logically to the traffic rule “when there’s a ONE WAY sign, only traffic from that direction is legal.”
Point being, it’s always the guys who can rise above nut pain (if you’ve never met one, then likely you’ve never been in a good old fashioned bar fight) who’ll kick yer ass…just as it’s the cars who drive the wrong way down a one-way street who’ll kill ya.
That kind of drama rarely works out in the real world, despite what Augustus Stupidus would have us believe.
“The Marines have a saying, “If you get them by the nuts their hearts and minds will follow.”
That might work in the USMC and maybe the Army but it doesn’t fly in the world of business with educated people. Wouldn’t fly in the Air Force either.
I’d vote for a fat, blind dog, before I’d vote for any of the self-serving candidates, running for this office today.
This country, is heading down the tube. Thanks, to the greed and corruption, present in our Congressional leaders. Not to mention the fact, they all have their own political agenda to satisfy. Which is secondary, to keeping this country safe and strong!!
Look at: Immigration, High fuel prices, Medicare, SSA debacle, Drug cost, Health insurance.
No one has a clue, how to solve any of these issues! And, We, voted these people into office.
Makes me sad, to see this country’s demise. But, I think we’re close to that point. I have no faith, that things will get any better. Give it five years!!
“How ironic Democratic eye rollers don’t know the difference between a Libertarian and a conservative“.
The problem is Republican they only have the present brand of “Conservative” to judge by. Big government, spending out of control, they could easily confuse them with social liberal .
“Anyone that believes that America deserved to be attacked, and is at fault for 9-11 should have “STUPID” tatooed on their forehead. And Ron Paul should be the first person in line“.
The was the spin that the extremist of the party put on it, not what he actually said.That has been the sixty four thousand dollars question since 9-11… Why did they do it?And it is only smart to try and understand the enemy, you can bet they have been studying us to find a weakness.”A supporter of the military would be questionably incomplete. My best guess is that under Paul the military would be reduced to a bare defense type of military, with very little offensive options.”
Of all the things I had learned about Rumsfield, the most surprising was that is exactly how he envisioned the military should be. Light, mobile and even planned to close most of our foreign bases and pull our troop back to the U.S. He planned on doing away with the heavy armor in favor of light, fast armor since the fall of the Soviets and the raise of enemies that were not so depended on heavy armor. As you might guess the top military officers were in a uproar over Rumsfield’s plans and were relieved at his departure. rather the strengthening the military as one would have thought Rumsfield would have done, he actually planned on making it weaker.
Decades from now, Ron Paul’s friends and supporters will look back on these few moments with a smile.
We few, we happy few.
Any Republican candidate that does not pass the abortion/divorce litmus test of the Far Right Christians cannot get their support so they will lose.
Any candidate who passes the abortion/divorce litmus test is so Far Right that they cannot find the support of everyday people to win.
Just like in 1992, the Republican vote will be split and Clinton will win.
The Far Right Christian albatross will sink the Republican Party for the next twelve years.
After that, the Mexican vote and future elections will go the Democrats who are carefully cultivating the Hispanic market.
It is so much fun watching the ‘mainstream’ Republicans (read: ‘Bushies’) try to tear Paul down; maybe even exclude him from the next debate. I wonder when they will do a ‘push poll’ about hid illegitimate black child in South Carolina!
“But because he has no chance of winning and therefore nothing to lose,” ………What do they send you folks a script?
We will see if he has a “chance” not only does he have a chance, He WILL be the next President of the United States of America!!!
He has the most important Supporter of all…….WE THE PEOPLE!
People like who ever writes this crap will see! This time WE THE PEOPLE are playing for keeps!
Sounds like some of you asses like the idea of BOMBING women and children.,..you know “shock and awe” Bring our Military HOME NOW!!!!! Anyone who doesn’t want to bring our troops home should have a tattoo put on their forheads saying Kill more TROOPS!
“But because he has no chance of winning and therefore nothing to lose,” ………What do they send you folks a script?
We will see if he has a “chance” not only does he have a chance, He WILL be the next President of the United States of America!!!
He has the most important Supporter of all…….WE THE PEOPLE!
People like who ever writes this crap will see! This time WE THE PEOPLE are playing for keeps!
Sounds like some of you asses like the idea of BOMBING women and children.,..you know “shock and awe” Bring our Military HOME NOW!!!!! Anyone who doesn’t want to bring our troops home should have a tattoo put on their forheads saying Kill more TROOPS!
You know after reading more comments I realized something that it seems many people don’t seem to get!
I am an AMERICAN not a Republican, Democrat etc… many of you don’t seem to get that, you let others define what you are!
Here is the part that will shock you silly people that think us AMERICANS are too stupid to know the difference between Ron Paul and George Bush!
Well I have news for you, we are NOT, just because Bush is a liar, doesn’t have anything to do with Dr. Paul, proof of that is the simple fact that Dr. Paul is hated by the bush patrol…….but guess what he is LOVED by us AMERICANS and for that matter, Many people around the world who are waiting for US, the United States of America to come back and lead by example like we used to many years ago!
Do you like the IRS stealing 1/3 of your check, then vote for Hillary, maybe you can get that up to 50% of your PAYCHECK!
Let me be clear, I have NEVER voted and I am this time, if I have to join the hated Republicans to get Dr. Paul in, then so be it……..oh you think I am alone………….I think not, are you not paying attention that us AMERICANS are about to take back our Country, if you don’t want to help, that is fine, but you had better stay out of our way, because this time WE ARE SERIOUS!
I wake up in the morning with a feeling that America has a new hope now that Pon Paul is on the scene. I plan to send a small contribution to his campagne today . It will be the first of many as he progresses up the ladder. HE CAN WIN THIS THING!
The corporate media outlets are never going to give Mr. Paul a fair shot. Our only hope is that Ron’s message will continue to be distributed by non-established media such as blogs, web sites, and polls. America is drunk on Federal $$$ and those that profit from this are going to do everything they can to quiet a genuine, small Government, conservative. Readers, keep spreading the word and hopefully we’ll be able to build some meaningful momentum behind Ron Paul.
Damn, where did all of these “reasonable” conservatives come from?
I confess I don’t know anything about Ron Paul, but he sounds like someone who bears watching. And I’d love to see both Dems and repubs tossed out in a presidential election.
I worked on the Perot campaign at the state and county level. I could support someone who’s independent, even if they have to hide under the classification of “republican”.
“Do you like the IRS stealing 1/3 of your check, then vote for Hillary, maybe you can get that up to 50% of your PAYCHECK!”
The IRS doesn’t “steal” 1/3 of my check. They take about 1/6th of it to pay for nice things like highways, the military, education, cops, firfighters and- YES- even the military you conservatives love to support (as long as you don’t have to pay anything) so much. In other words, the money pays for things that keep the USA from being a third world shithole like Hati or Mexico.
t
I—-am an AMERICAN. I am a CITIZEN. I am CONCERNED. I am a VETERAN (Marines Vietnam 67-68). I am willing to fight anywhere any time for our founders ideals. I am committed to RON PAUL. The rest of the candidates are saying what the present audience want’s to hear. Ron tells us what he really thinks. HONESTY AND INTEGRITY???? what a novel idea. Put your money where your mouth is. Send the check. It takes it to get the word out. Thank you.
Ron Paul is talking about “big Government”
How big?
The nation’s 31.6 million fereral, state and local government workers form a large, growing, and well-compensated class in society. Fereral, state and local workers earned $36 per hour in wages and benefits in 2005, on average, compared to $24 per hour for U.S. private-sector workers, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Summary, published December 9, 2005.
Ron Paul’s got more hits on his thread than all the current Brownback one’s
Government uses the term “private-sector” as if it was some small part of America that they must reluctantly or loathsomely deal with from their lofty and more important position.
They seem to outgrown their “civil service status.”
We don’t want the so-called “war” in Iraq, so we’re left with their reasoning that there is little that can be done about that.
I believe that’s called arrogance and just who in the hell do they think they are?
It’s time to bring the troops home now and if the “bogeyman” follows them back, we’ll just deal with that unlikely scenario if and when it happens.
In the meanwhile our sons and daughters will stop dying for government’s nonsense and idiotic reasoning.
Find some other way to strut your self proclaimed importance.
Your procrastination is tiresome and bloody.
7 troops have been killed so far today.
That’s 7 more than would have died if congress had done what the people had voted them to do.
Ron Paul is the only honest candidate out there. GO RON PAUL GO.
Ron Paul is like the Jimmy Carter of his era. Jimmy Carter was also the only honest politician we have had in the past 30 years and look what the Republicans did to Carter.
Reagan even went so far as to trade arms for hostages. Of course, in his most earnest of speeches, Reagan always denounced negotiating with terrorists (unless it was to get his butt into the White House).
I don’t hear the Republicans pull that out of Reagan’s resume for all the world to see. Wonder why?
So, actually, did Reagan cause the current Iraq/Iran mess? Could be, could be.
sam – Reagan sure helped cause it with his support for Saddam’s war against Iran.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20070518/cm_uc_crpbux/op_332799
But Who Was Right — Rudy or Ron?Fri May 18, 3:00 AM ETIt was the decisive moment of the South Carolina debate.
?Hearing Rep. Ron Paul recite the reasons for Arab and Islamic resentment of the United States, including 10 years of bombing and sanctions that brought death to thousands of Iraqis after theTop of Form 1???????Bottom of Form 1Gulf War, Rudy Giuliani broke format and exploded:”That’s really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of 9-11, that we invited the attack because we were attackingTop of Form 2???????Bottom of Form 2Iraq. I don’t think I have ever heard that before, and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11.”I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us what he really meant by it.”The applause for Rudy’s rebuke was thunderous — the soundbite of the night and best moment of Rudy’s campaign.After the debate, on Fox News’ “Hannity and Colmes,” came one of those delicious moments on live television. As Michael Steele, GOP spokesman, was saying that Paul should probably be cut out of future debates, the running tally of votes by Fox News viewers was showing Ron Paul, with 30 percent, the winner of the debate.Brother Hannity seemed startled and perplexed by the votes being text-messaged in the thousands to Fox News saying Paul won, Romney was second, Rudy third and McCain far down the track at 4 percent.”I would ask the congressman to … tell us what he meant,” said Rudy.A fair question and a crucial question.When Ron Paul said the 9-11 killers were “over here because we are over there,” he was not excusing the mass murderers of 3,000 Americans. He was explaining the roots of hatred out of which the suicide-killers came.Lest we forget,Top of Form 3???????Bottom of Form 3Osama bin Laden was among the mujahideen whom we, in the Reagan decade, were aiding when they were fighting to expel the Red Army fromTop of Form 4???????Bottom of Form 4Afghanistan. We sent them Stinger missiles, Spanish mortars, sniper rifles. And they helped drive the Russians out.What Ron Paul was addressing was the question of what turned the allies we aided into haters of the United States. Was it the fact that they discovered we have freedom of speech or separation of church and state? Do they hate us because of who we are? Or do they hate us because of what we do?Osama bin Laden in his declaration of war in the 1990s said it was U.S. troops on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia, U.S. bombing and sanctions of a crushed Iraqi people, and U.S. support of Israel’s persecution of the Palestinians that were the reasons he and his mujahideen were declaring war on us.Elsewhere, he has mentioned Sykes-Picot, the secret British-French deal that double-crossed the Arabs who had fought for their freedom alongside Lawrence of Arabia and were rewarded with a quarter century of British-French imperial domination and humiliation.Almost all agree that, horrible as 9-11 was, it was not anarchic terror. It was political terror, done with a political motive and a political objective.What does Rudy Giuliani think the political motive was for 9-11?Was it because we are good and they are evil? Is it because they hate our freedom? Is it that simple?Ron Paul says Osama bin Laden is delighted we invaded Iraq.Does the man not have a point? The United States is now tied down in a bloody guerrilla war in the Middle East and increasingly hated in Arab and Islamic countries where we were once hugely admired as the first and greatest of the anti-colonial nations. Does anyone think that Osama is unhappy with what is happening to us in Iraq?Of the 10 candidates on stage in South Carolina, Dr. Paul alone opposed the war. He alone voted against the war. Have not the last five years vindicated him, when two-thirds of the nation now agrees with him that the war was a mistake, and journalists and politicians left and right are babbling in confession, “If I had only known then what I know now …”Rudy implied that Ron Paul was unpatriotic to suggest the violence against us out of the Middle East may be in reaction to U.S. policy in the Middle East. Was President Hoover unpatriotic when, the day after Pearl Harbor, he wrote to friends, “You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bitten.”Pearl Harbor came out of the blue, but it also came out of the troubled history of U.S.-Japanese relations going back 40 years. Hitler’s attack on Poland was naked aggression. But to understand it, we must understand what was done at Versailles — after the Germans laid down their arms based on Wilson’s 14 Points. We do not excuse — but we must understand.Ron Paul is no TV debater. But up on that stage in Columbia, he was speaking intolerable truths. Understandably, Republicans do not want him back, telling the country how the party blundered into this misbegotten war.By all means, throw out of the debate the only man who was right from the beginning on Iraq.To find out more aboutTop of Form 5???????Bottom of Form 5Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at http://www.creators.com.
ron paul is just crazy. so are his dolt followers. Who seriously thinks they can win an election by spamming people and generally annoying the hell out of everyone?? I don’t think a democrat would even do that and expect to win. I could be wrong on that since there are some kooks on that side of the aisle. I think congress should have a vote to make ron paul switch to being a democrat since he already has liberal views and he is a disgrace to the republican party. He would fit right in with the tin foil hat liberal crowd!
Ron Paul holds core conservative values. The Republican party has a glaring disgrace in the cabal surrounding George W. Bush.
That consensus is widely held throughout the country, as well as on both sides of the aisle.
Out of all the candidates, Ron Paul seems like the best one to me. His record speaks for itself, and I’ll be proud to vote for him. I really hope he is able to secure the Republican nomination, because I cannot support any of the other candidates that the media has annointed as frontrunners.
I hope the GOP bans him from the next debate.
;^)
Well they failed Ben! Haha! Scared of a conservative? Didn’t Reagan himself say conservatives and libertarians were essentially the same?
Dr. Paul is clearly speaking about issues that the other candidates won’t. His support is real and growing and yet the Eagle never mentioned his name until Saturday, June 16, in an article about the National Right To Life Committee convention in KCMO the day before, where Paul, Romney and Brownback were the only presidential candidates to appear. Rather than report this “news” the Eagle seems to be hiding the facts about Ron Paul’s presendential campaign. I am still waiting for the Eagle to publish the following letter I submited last Thursday, June 15th,where I take issue with the editorial page cartoon that ran Saturday, the 9th. Here is that letter:
I must take issue with Borgman’s Editorial Page cartoon (June 9) that showed an elephant sitting in front of 10 bowls of vanilla ice cream. It was obviously meant to convey the idea that all of the candidates are both uniformly similar and bland
This is not the case regarding Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) who served 5 terms in Congress in the 70’s and 80’s and is currently serving his 10th term having been back in the US House since 1997. In the interim Dr. Paul (an OB/GYN physician and former pilot and flight surgeon in the USAF) was the 1988 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate and still holds a Lifetime Membership in that party.
Dr. Paul has a voting record in Congress that is consistently and strictly according to the US Constitution. He never votes for a bill that goes beyond what the Constitution allows the federal government (which is most of what the Congress does these days) and is known as Dr. No for this reason.
Dr. Paul has never voted for increased taxes, an unbalanced budget, going to war (although he did vote to allow the military to go after Al Queda following the 9-11 attacks) and he has voted against the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act (which stripped us of the right of Habeas Corpus) and any and all increases in the number or budget of any government agencies not expressly authorized by the Constitution.
Dr. Paul has not accepted any increase in pay since returning to Congress. He returns a large portion of his allotment for staff and office expenses each year to the US Treasury. No lobbyist ever darkens his door as they know that they are wasting their time on the Honorable Dr. Paul (one of the few if not the only Member of Congress deserving of that Title).
As if that weren’t enough, Dr. Paul inspires people by speaking from the heart the message of freedom and liberty, Constitutional limitations on government, free marketsand spreading the blessings of freedom by example, friendship and trade, not weapons and war. This message is simple and compelling. It gives Americans hope for the future and pride in themselves and their country.
Borgman is dead wrong. Dr. Paul is no bowl of the same old vanilla the rest of the crowd is serving up. Dr. Paul is not just another politician, but rather a statesman, the likes of which is all but extinct this day and age.
Please go to RonPaul2008.com for more information on this rarity in American Politics.
Steven A. RosileWichita, Kansas
Ron Paul will bring home America’s true values and protect and defend our constitution.
Ron Paul needs to be the next President of the United States of America.
Steven,
Stop beating around the bush(strangely appropriate there). Please tell us what you really think !
Small governmentGreater power to each stateStrong bordersNo amnestyHands off foreign policy
What’s not to like?
OK so I have gone to Mr. Paul’s web site because of talk of him. I find it interesting and since he doesn’t fall neatly into one camp (Dem or Rep) has aspects that appeal to different people. Some of his ideas of far-fetched, some common sense, some just wacko and some expose something I don’t like — hypocrisy. I know shocking to think of a politician LOL. But he is supposed to be “different.” Or so his very loud supporters want to drum into your head on threat of death. But someone that goes on and on about getting the government out of people’s personal lives, decisions, bodies, etc. deny a woman’s right to choose? Maybe because he is a man! (so am I). I understand that he knows the miracle of birth and I’m right with him that abortion is a tragic thing, but it sadly has to be legal. And how can someone “pro-life” be for the death penalty and believe everyone should be armed with AK-47s. Ultimately he is not a viable candidate and while I like some of what he says, he is nuts.