FREEDOM ★ OPPORTUNITY ★ PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Paul's voice drives me nuts. He sounds like a screech owl suffering from acid reflux. The words coming out of Obama's mouth are just as stupid and/or unbelievable, but at least they have a pleasant tone. Sheesh.
Happy Hills Sanitarium is calling you Ron Paul.
I can't stand listen to his whining eitherThe fiscal ideas/audit the Fed is awesome, though... most of the rest of his bit disqualifies him to the extreme, imho
A handfull of empire-lovers objected to the idea that we should not send assault teams into sovereign allies, and destabalize them, when other means are available.A very reasonable position. I'm sure the founding fathers would agree with it.If you DON'T, your a big-government loving fascist. Look in the mirror.
Yep, you figured me outNüht über alles!btw- why do all you Paulbots post anonymously?
If Newt or Perry (yea I still like the guy) grab Allen West as a VP I think we have team!
The war-mongering clowns who control the GOP STILL THINK that wanting to war on everyone on sight for the least provocation is a "wise" idea.5000 American dead,many more thousands severely wounded and billions of dollars later the people increasingly agree with Paul.But don't tell the future-losers to Obama that....
Oh,and btw,latest polling shows Mitt losing to Obamay including with independents...Paul is winning independents....just saying:)
Dear Multi-AnonsGo away- this is a REAGANITE peace-through-strength blog... Ron Paul scores a ZERO on my most important hot button issue... sorryNo disrespect, Paul is just great on spending, Fed audit, etc... but it's a shame you can't admit the guy took himself out of widespread consideration with bizarre stands on defense and other issues.I DO NOT WANT endless wars, Reagan mostly avoided them... but I also DO NOT WANT A NUCLEAR IRAN, and am willing to bomb the crap out of them to prevent it.Paul's naivete on this very key issue makes him a dangerous man... that is, if he ever acutally had a prayer of being president.
Either we go to the known source of the threat to this nation and (as Newt said) "Kill Them" or they come here and kill us. Maybe even you, Anon, and your spouse and children. Hiding behind our boarder and wagging our finger at our known and sworn enemy, brought us 9-11As Clinton did, lobbing a couple of tomahawk cruise missiles at an empty warehouse got us 3000 dead Americans.
KILL THEMYou have to make it a dangerous business to be a self-proclaimed enemy of the United States of America... simple as that
"You have to make it a dangerous business to be a self-proclaimed enemy of the United States of America... simple as that"....Like stripping My citizenship from me if Obama or Romney considers me An enemy of the United States pursuant to the laws of war?I am pretty sure the Iranians are not going to kick in the door in the middle of the night and dissapper you. DHSS, not so much.Neo-cons are so focused on the "enemy" out "there" that you have totally missed the fact you have wandered into a minefield. Then you call those shouting warnings to you "bots".This primary is going to end, and a whole lot of people are going to be alienated. Good luck trying to get those your mocking to come over to your team for the big win. I know I have had my fill. Reagan had a big tent. Reagan understood peace through superior firepower was not spead yourself too thin. Or dismantle your heavy warfighting divisions to optimize your military for killing 9th century throwbacks. Russia has rebuilt it's military. The Chinese are flat out creating a conventional warfighting machine and going balls out to create a blue water navy.This continues to be unanswered by us.Reagan understood Christian Just War principles.Reagan knew that Beruit was a no win, hence the pull out of the Marines after the bombing. He pursued revenge by other means.What seems to be lacking in "conservitive" blogs is consevitism. What I see is Neo-con warmongering. That is not Reaganism. If it was, Reagan would have won the cold war with the evil empire via land war in Europe or by massive nuclear exchange. But that did not happen. A thinking man of princple is what we need in the WhiteHouse. Not a thug or a Bankster.Remamber also, the establishment Republicans hated reagan also. They feared another Goldwater blowout. Thing is, Goldwater would WIN in a landslide in 2012.I weep for my country, as those who I thought were my friends are nothing of the sort.
James:I hate to scold you on this point because we agree on more than we disagree, but feel I must, so here it is:If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals -- if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.RONALD REAGAN, Reason Magazine, Jul. 1, 1975
The Reagan era had a radically different defense policy than Ron Paul- and the Iranians were horrified of him.I stand with Israel against a nuclear Iran, and I doubt greatly anybody could ever come up with a good reason to allow the apocolyptic, 7th century savages in Tehran to posses nuclear weapons... only adults get to play with thoseAnd what's the point of these diatribes, anyway- we are to vote for Ron Paul, I suppose? The same intellectual cripple that thinks 9/11 was an inside job?
"And what's the point of these diatribes, anyway- we are to vote for Ron Paul, I suppose?"No, just to remind you that besides who we would like to see as president, we both share the common demo-rat foes. Let's try to keep the friendly fire to just that; friendly. It is a long way to November.
Thank you Toaster, peaceful conflict resolution is always preferrable- there's hope for us yetNot for Iran though... we already tried that for too longWhere you guys need to realize Paul destroys his viability as a serious leader is something else Reagan said- you NEVER tell the enemy what you will or will not do!!!When they asked him how he would have won the Vietnam war -and would the Gipper have been willing to nuke them- Reagan said "Oh no, that wasn't necessary... but I'd like them to go to bed each and every night thinking I MIGHT"Thanks for giving Tehran the green light by telling them what you won't do, Ron PaulPure stupidity- and delusion, as he keeps lying to himself and anybody else within earshot about how Iran is 'not a threat'.
Ron Paulists people are *WACKO* !I love your graphics, LOL
The Reaganite Republican welcomes your comments...