E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
LE MARS, Iowa -- Texas Rep. Ron Paul defended his foreign policy views on Friday amid signs that those views, and how they jibe with the Republican base, could be a vulnerability in his bid for the GOP's presidential nomination.
Paul held steadfastly to his anti-war message before a crowd of 200 people, despite being attacked by other presidential hopefuls, who have assailed Paul's views as dangerous to national security.
Addressing this criticism Paul asked the crowd, "Guess where I get the strongest support? Active duty people."
With just four days left until the Jan. 3 caucuses, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are running neck and neck, with Romney at 23 percent among likely caucus-goers and Paul at 21 percent, according to an NBC/Marist poll. NBC's Peter Alexander reports.
"They don't want these kind of wars. They're not anxious to get involved in wars that are not in our national defense," the libertarian-minded congressman continued.
Paul said in response to a question about Republicans who viewed his foreign policy as radical that it was the same belief system he'd held for three decades.
Paul went on to explain that he felt the same way when he was drafted in 1962 during the Vietnam War, saying the nation wasn't threatened by the Vietnamese.
Paul said he felt as though his opponents had seized because he doesn't "have any flip-flops" and they had to do something. He said that it was unfair to characterize him as an isolationist, and defended it from assertions that he was weak, asserting, it's "not weak to talk," before dropping bombs.
For the second day, while warning about the encroachment of civil liberties, Paul spoke about a bill in Congress that would regulate the Internet. He said the Internet is a good "unlicensed" way for people to talk to each other and told the crowd the issue of civil liberties is important because "it eventually attacks all our liberties," and that means "religious liberties can be attacked."
Paul said his "message won't be on evening news," but a small group of people can change the world -- even quoting Samuel Adams -- saying there are "so many brushfires" burning across the country and that they are being spread in "a viral manner through the internet."
Leave a Comment:
The GOP will be comparing Paul to President Obama now for suggesting we 'talk to our enemies.'
Ron Paul is the only reasonable voice advocating reduction of forward deployment of American troops which currently costs American taxpayers $350 Billion a year most of which becomes "outsourced" to foreigners. Bring ‘em home and a lot of military paychecks will be spent in American restaurants and for purchase of American products and services.
I fully support Paul’s idea to discontinue the gifting of Billions of American taxpayer dollars to ungrateful and hateful corrupt dictators, much of which is passed directly on to American enemy troops including Al Quaeda.
Let foreign countries support themselves by the sweat of their own brows.
But what about the wars? We need those wars.
Look how safe Iraq is now after the wars. Isn't the middle east So gosh darned safe after 10 years of war?
Ron Paul's crazy. End the wars? Use that money to balance the budget and rebuild America? Crazy.
Isn't it so much better to take tax payer money and ship it right overseas to other countries?
And I heard he wants to legalize drugs to bankrupt the cartels and treat addiction? So crazy. Just because ending Prohibition on Alcohol put the mob out of business in the alcohol racket, does that mean with drugs it would bankrupt the cartels?
What's with this Ron Paul guy? Look how great the war on drugs has been!
hey maybe when Obama wins his next term we should send romney or paul over to be president of Iraq I bet they would make it a great country with their wonderful ideas
The Old Republicans need to deal with the fact that it is Ron Paul all the way. We make up a large part of what is left of the Republican party. One way or another we are voting for Ron Paul in 2012.
What military support is he talkig about, I retired with 30 years and I'm sorry but ron paul sounds too much like an isolationist for me. While I agree we should be more careful about what and how we get involved with other countries, not illegal wars like bush brought us into, we still need to be a major force not only to protect our interest and those of our allies but when necessary be the policemen and ensure justice and liberty throughout the world. Please make sure you read what I said again "when necessary". Also why aren't you giving President Obama credit? He basically did what most of you are complaining about, basically ended a war we illegally entered, and is trying to get us out of Afgan! I can''t help but feel that the reason he so hated is because he is black! Put your bias aside and look, really look at what he has done without all the twisting of the truth or downright lies. His economic policies, unpopular as they were prevented this country from being in a worse economic cndition then it is. His foreign policies and actions make bush look like an inept child. His love for the people and this country are genuine without flipfloopping all about the issues. President Obama is willing to talk first but he is also willing to take action when necessary. Oh one other thing, newspaper don't talk much about this anymore but if you remember under bush, the US status in the world was going downhill, even our allies were not happy with us, funny but I have not heard that kind of talk lately at all!
Your dear President Obama just signed into law the detention of anyone deemed a threat to the status quo could be subject to indefinite detention with no right to trial.
I trully hope your 30 years of service has been well worth it.
Do you remember day one?
"I, (state your name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
...Obama just wiped his ass with it.
When are you clowns going to get serious. Not one of these morons are electable. All are in Iowa pandering to a bunch of teagagger religious fanatic.
I have spoken to many 18 to 28 somethings who support Ron Paul... I ask them why... First out of the gate is the fact he wants to legalize drugs. Now, I don't know about you guys but I'm not looking forward to explaining that the President does not have the power to do that... it would need to pass House and Senate first!! Thank God.
Eric-4108916: You need to read the facts on what he signed.
www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/singleton/
Okay, Dr Paul supporters. This is between you and the GOP. We folks on the left are just going to watch the show and eat our popcorn. :)
Gee, I don't know Phine. After years of a neocon and liberal obsession with foreign intervention, Paul's foreign policy is sweet sweet music, at least to this lefty's ears.
phinephancy, You sound just like the "hare" in the tortoise and the hare.
Every second Obama and the democratic party spends "waiting" the GOP is out there recruiting voters and gathering a well developed base of enthusiastic supporters spreading the message of Constitutionality through the independent voters. If you remember the hare lost the race because of his inability to understand the difference between a sprint and a marathon. Obama is running the "too little too late" campaign.
Obama is simply an irresponsible pick at this point. McCain was the most irresponsible pick in 100 years so that one was a gimme. It does not matter who the GOP puts on the ticket.... Obama has a massive uphill battle to convince anyone he can get anything done. He was a "good times" President hired to kiss babies and wave at the people for 4 years during the best of economic times but walked into a global collapse and US depression. He does not have the tool set or the stomach to clean up this mess of corporations emptying the treasury and the Federal Reserve destroying the economy to cover their bad gambling debts. He is simply waving at everyone as we have corporate anarchy quickly turning into a Fascist state with the massive buildup of local law enforcement with black faceless Gestapo uniforms, automatic weapons and crowd control devices.
Wrong guy for the current job. He would have been fine as an ornamental President during the good times of a FED bubble like Bush was but this is one ugly mess that needs someone with the tool set and stomach to remove these global terrorists from our government. Comparing him to other worthless Presidents is futile at this point. You need a different kind of captain to save a sinking ship than the ones who directed the "cruise" during the good times.
Obama ceased being left wing after Libya and not vetoing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Obama is a neo-con.
Not as bad as McCain would have been, but still not change we can believe in.
Eat your popcorn and vote for the Status Quo and keep the Big Government afloat? Thats all you Obama supporters will do! Paul is what you thought Obama stood for ! Wise up and vote for honesty backed by consistancy! Ron Paul 2012 !!
And after that lose the General election to Dr. Ron Paul.
Ron Paul 2012!
That sounds like a fair deal Phinephancy!! :) I've seen your posts a lot on here, you seem level headed. RP is right, his message won't be on the evening news. Of course not, the status quo must be defended at all costs! I dont even agree with all of his ideas, BUT the ones i agree with, i agree so strongly with they out-weigh the others. End to bull$hit wars for profit. We as a nation are spending 2 Billion$ a WEEK in Afghanistan. This $ is going somewhere! RP has proposed ending all foreign aid, Let's fix OUR problems HERE AT HOME! He is the only candidate with any fiscal sanity, proposing a balanced federal budget within his first term. The man has proposed a 90% pay cut for himself, $39,344 which is the current median pay of the average American worker.(Current Presidential salary $400,000 + $50,000 expenses) Who proposes a 90% pay cut for THEMSELVES? A defender time and time again of the Constitution. There is lots of mis-information about the guy, anyone interested in him should check out his site. And people of faith out there, i feel you especially should give Dr. Paul a good look. He is pro-life, but doesn't feel the need to press this onto others. Ron Paul is for a state by state decision on abortion, not a federal mandate. Thanks for reading this far, and Happy New Year people!!
War is a solution for those who have dodged the draft or have never experienced military service.
Those who've experienced war don't want it.
Yeah!
Watch the mainstream try and take control of the Internet now, that is what Egypt and most of the dictatorships have tried to do when protests go "viral" on the Internet!
He is NOT weak on Foreign Policy! He's actually the strongest one on this issue! The most in-line with common folk in America, it's why the grunts in the ranks support him almost 3-1.
Yep, you won't hear it on the news, you might hear twisted snippets of it on News for DUM FUX as they try to stem the damage he is doing to Quote: "Their Election"
You gotta hand it to "Neo-Con News, News that wants to blow you away!" they always seem to get it wrong.
President Eisenhower warned us about the Military Industrial Complex way back in the 50's. He said "They will always need an enemy." Looks like he was right, Congress has not declared war since WW2 in 1941. Yet how many "conflicts" have we been part of. A big list, i don't feel like typing it all out, you people with historical knowledge already know. I guarentee if their was a little ticker on all the major television networks that showed how much WE ARE ALL PAYING per second/minute/hour in these unending wars, things would change in a hurry! How did this idea of policing the world get such a deep grip on so many people. IMO lack of literacy/ lack of caring. Out of sight-out of mind. Ron Paul is one of only 2 candidates that have served in a branch of the military. (Rick Perry is the other) He knows what it feels like to be drafted, facing possible injury or death. Ron Paul for peace, Ron Paul for fiscal sanity, Ron Paul GOP Nominee 2012. Say No Way to the corporate warfare machine.
Good point with Eisenhower. The problem is the sick way we let Generals move into the military contractor industry. In some years, the move from general staff to industry is a virtual clean sweep. Thirty-four out of 39 three- and four-star generals and admirals who retired in 2007 are now working in defense roles — nearly 90 percent.
Dozens of retired generals employed by defense firms maintain Pentagon advisory roles, giving them unparalleled levels of influence and access to inside information on Department of Defense procurement plans. These Generals who become lobbyists under the guise of "advisers" are pure poison to our government. We actually "fabricate" wars to keep these stocks moving up and management bonus's being paid.
The generals are, in many cases, recruited for private sector roles well before they retire, raising questions about their independence and judgment while still in uniform. The Pentagon is aware and even supports this practice. It is the most profitable legalized conflict of interest "Good Ole Boy's" club on the planet.
Then you all wonder why we are invading foreign countries with no clear motives and ZERO consistency. We only invade oil rich countries who are throwing the international bankers out of their country...... not the other countless people under cruel governments or rulers....coincidence?
This is HILARIOUSLY TRAGIC.
Ron Paul shouldn't have to defend HIS stance at all.
The fear-mongers and WAR-mongers who dominate both this primary AND Wahington, should be made to explain AND apologize for all they've put US, and a boat-load of other nations' populaces through.......just before we execute them for TREASON against the American people.
.....but "truth is TREASON in the empire of LIES"...........so we get RIDICULOUS headlines like this instead.
Bring him "home" IOWA!
RON PAUL 2012!
Exactly, its absurd.
Good for Paul. Glad to see someone has the sense to oppose foreign involvement unless it is in National defense.
He is right about Vietnam and Iraq and nobody can debate it, because we were never threatened by either. That is why they came up with the phony WMD BS, there had to be magic bomb in a suitcase, because how else can you claim you are threatened by a country that is something like 14,000 miles away, that has no air force, no navy, and would starve to death in a month if we did not feed them. The only way they can harm us is with small arms fire and IED's and as soon as you leave you are out of range, it is now time to leave Afghanistan as well.
Aren't we lucky that people like you didn't control France in the 1770s', we'de still be a British colony if they had! We recieved help to gain our independance and we would be ugly hypocrits to refuse others the same opportunity!
Tedcrawford, You Idiot ! England was USA back in the day ! An empire ! We are now that Empire ! You don't know / understand History you Fool ! France didn't like Warmongering Empires like England ! Neither did much of the civilized world. Much is the same today which explains the world views towards America! Plus , Iraq & Afg. did not invite us either! What a moron you are !!!!!
constitutionalbacker???
What is it about you Alinskites that you never use anything substantive to make your point, but resort instead to name calling? I feel sorry for you, it must be very difficult to function in society with that twisted thought process! Good luck to you!
By the way, although you are clearly not really interested in a different viewpoint, I don't back every military action anymore than I back Ron Pauls never any military action. As Winston Churchill explained "The price of greatness is responsibility"
Uh Ted we asked, literally begged France for help with our revolution, Iraq did not ask us to attack them and liberate them from themselves, we have weakened them as a sovereign nation not strengthened them. If you want to talk history we backed Saddam Hussein to the hilt (when our puppet leader installed by the CIA the Shah of Iran was run off by the people of Iran) because Iraq was at war with Iran. He was our great friend back then and we lavished him with weapons and support. To quote Winston Churchill is kind of silly with regards to Iraq, they did not and could not attack us in any fashion, the entire UN turned down our request to sanction our invasion, and if you want to talk about France our oldest friend in the world they said don't do it, we will have no part of it. When you oldest friend in the world tells you you are making a mistake perhaps you should listen.
Let me point out the one instance of the proper use of force that Dr Paul supported,
Desert Storm, Kuwait ASKED us as an ally to help liberate them. Dr Paul supported the resolution to do so. And, although I do believe we didn't quite finish the "job", We destroyed the fifth largest army on the planet in two weeks, was it right? We had Syrian Tanks attached to our forces in doing it. I would say it was right, and when it was done we got OUT!
This is what Dr Paul will support, for those of you who say he is an isolationist, how do you spin this?
Egilman, I don't know where you are getting your information, but Dr Paul wasn't even in Congress when the Gulf War was taking place. He voluntarily relinquished his seat in 1984 to return to his medical practice, and was re-elected to it in 1997.
In any event, he would likely have NOT approved of the Gulf War because Iraq invading Kuwait because Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraqi oil fields did not threaten our national security. Please get your facts straight.
The reason he sounds "weak" on foreign policy is because Ron Paul's policy does not match the policy of the GOP and Democratic defense lobbies. He also refuses to promote a US war machine to join a 2000 year old failed Christian/Muslim battle that has had ZERO progress since Christ.
When you remove all the profiting from "war" or defense spending the reasons for those wars melt like an ice cream in the sun. They have to borrow massive amounts of money creating an absolutely endless stream of profits for the FED bankers, the military contractors have sky high stock prices with big payoffs to investors and management. Federal contract employees live in a wonderland of overpayment because there is no "competitive" profit to be made, no marketing or anything else. It is either no bid contracts that ALL run WAY over budget or the contracts are awarded simply based on party lobby money collected prior to the award.
The entire "war" effort is nothing but a trumped up predatory profiteering scam with the US taxpayers as the prey. They call this a "foreign policy"? If you took the massive profits out of the US wars the federal government and all its corporate defense lobby's would leave it like chetahs at a salad bar.
The DOD has not had a full audit since 2001. Obama recently passed a bill letting the DOD run without audits until 2017. They are a black hole we throw a trillion a year into. How convenient it has evolved into our single largest national expenditure and just keeps growing.
Have you ever seen a member of Congress trying to read a "partial" DOD audit? Over 85% of the document contents are blacked out and classified "top secret". It is a complete joke. Nobody has the classifications to read a complete DOD audit even if it existed except people that have conflicts of interest.
May want to revise that 2000 year old figure. Islam didn't come into being until the 7th century.
So let's continue the ridiculous wars Chucky Stewart, with you in the front lines. Let's take a look at all of the interventions the U.S. has gotten into with the middle east. Iran: 1953, Lebanon 1958 and 1982-1984, Libya 1981-1986, Iran-Iraq war 1980-1990, Gulf War 1991.... should I go on? We've been in the middle east forever and nothing good has ever come of it. I want to know: how does anyone declare victory over the war on terror? I find that the answers seem to be obscure. You can't stop people from disliking you and killing their neighbors and family doesn't make them like you any more. Beef up defense at home and stop barraging someone's backyard.
Why are you calling me out? I agree with you. The obsession our leaders have had with sticking their noses in other countries has to stop.
You are Right on Buffalo Tipper! We have basically been going to the middle east, doing a @!$%#ty remodeling job that constantly needs upkeeping. Ron Paul is the governments only hope of becoming " Homes on Homes " . Lets Get out and Stay out . they will either fix them selves or blow themselves up! Israel can and will take care of herself! She always has and always will. If she needs any supplies, we will sell them to her at a rediculously low " our friends " discount !!
And just what does China do while all this takes place in her backyard? Remember Ron Paul doesn't rule there!
I just would like to point out that nothing is ever black and white in the world. There are many shades of gray inbetween. I wish all would realize this. That is my real problem with Dr. Paul's views - no shades of gray. We live in a global community. Look at how we all are communicating now. Some who post here are from Canada and Australia. It just isn't that cut and dry anymore.
But I have enjoyed all your posts.
Phine,
I've been monitoring the international opinions that I've seen expressed on the various internet sites I visit on a regular basis, what I find interesting, if it was up to everyone else in the world, from England, to China, Ron Paul would be the president in a landslide of mountainous proportions like 30-1.
Most actually wonder how the people of America can be so stupid to not understand what he stands for, and why we allow the media to ignore him or cut him to ribbons. I tell them that this is how it works in a Representative Republic with a free press, they just don't seem to get it sometimes....
Egilman,
It's not that Dr. Paul's views on staying out of others affairs is a bad one, it is too absolute. The days of trying to be isolationist cannot succeed. Our markets are too intertwined. Our dependence on each other, see, the shades of gray.
Babe, he's not talking about closing embassies or anything like that, in fact he will probably open more. He's talking about re-energising fair trade discussions with anyone that wants it, what is bad about that? It certainly not isolationism.
Being an isolationist is all about ending any and all contact, withdrawing our ambassadors and closing off relations and trade. That would be a disaster of mega proportions.
Our foreign policy perpetuating the "war on terror" is like me sleeping with my friend's girlfriend and coming to the conclusion that I got punched in the face for how incredibly good looking I am.
Yeah just like they hate us for our freedom, BS they hate us because we use their children as slaves in US owned factories. People hate us because they watch their child walk out of a Nike plant barefoot.
Here, in the quietness of this Friday night, I am thinking of all the politics and issues facing us today. Each side (and, yes, I am including myself in this) gets caught up in the rhetoric and trying to prove each side wrong. But, truthfully, deep down, don't we all want the same thing - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Security, both physical and financial. If we can agree on these same principles, why, calmly can't we learn to compromise on the solutions?
Shades of gray.
Your argument is a lot more aligned with Dr. Paul's, than you think. First of all, he is not an Isolationist, like you have previously claimed. He is a non-interventionist. North Korea is Isolationist. Sweden is Non-Interventionist. I hope you get the difference. He, on several occasions, had clarified his position that he would not hesitate to go to war if there was enough evidence that a country was posing an immediate threat to America's existence. But he begs to defer with the process in which the wars are started. He just wants to follow the constitution and allow the Congress to vote for a War, before going out with a specific plan and winning it and coming home immediately. Do you realize that the last legal War we fought was in 1941? None of the wars ever since were declared, and hence illegal!!! Also, he never said he would dismantle the intelligence agencies or military departments. He just said he would shut down bases in allied territories (except strategic forward bases close to known enemy states). So, it is not like USA under President Paul will be blind to the shenanigans of enemy states.
phine,
Yes we do and if, just IF we continue to discuss the issues and leave the distrust and rhetoric behind, we just might start a new revolution of peace and justice in this country.
But, it will be a fight, the forces of partisan anger and divisivness are strong, the messages of hate burn DEEP and are not soon forgotten.
We are all AMERICANS, and we need to start acting like it before we destroy ourselves....
Phinephancy, Please list specifically any other shades of gray that you wish to discuss. You come across as "undecided" and educated as well. You obviously do not have that, " If you're not like me, I hate you " , attitude . You appear very opened minded and curious . We all respect you !! Ron Paul has made alot of people do an "aboutface" and I for one, am embarrassed at the way I use to be and think! I am sure in time that with a little time and unbiased research, you will come to be more of a Ron Paul supporter !!
Ron Paul will restore the "True Light of Liberty" and along with OUR HELP, will rebuild this nations 'Self-Respect" and Repatriate America! Ron Paul 2012... Stop the Lies.... Stop the WARS!! Ciao
Egilman- you posted above a statement about people from other countries wondering why people here dont understand Ron Paul's positions or why they say nothing about how he's either ignored in the media/cut to pieces. I would say this is due to a lack of general literacy. How many people does anyone know who reads a book once a week? How about once a month? Let alone a book thats informative. The average Joe/Jane is a hopeless TV addict. It's on when they get up in the morning, still on when they go to bed. TV promotes short attention spans, especially when started at an early age. Everybody knows the book version of a story is always better than the film version, becuase the plot is allowed to thicken more, more depth to the story. This is why we see the comments of "He/she looks presidential" RP's statements about policies don't fit into nice 5 second sound bites. Not even close. I could go a lot more into this but it's late. Simply put, Ron Paul is the thinking man/womans candidate. This is why he shows up so highly in polls of people who have their minds already made up. Everyone that is a RP supporter NEEDS to spread the word to their friends/family/colleagues WHO ARE NOT online. If i didn't have acsess (sp) to the internet i would have either not heard of the man, or worse figured he was "unelectable,fringe,kooky" RP's policies resonate well with most people. No more foreign aid. Lets fix our problems at home. No more bailouts. Corporate America's profits are still good,while millions of regular people struggling. End pointless unending wars. 8000+ young people dead, thousands with life shattering injuries. Back to the Constitution. Liberty for all, young,old,middle aged,brown,yellow,black,white. Liberty brings people together. America used to be a place everyone wanted to be a part of, a place looked up to worldwide. We've lost our way. RP is a desperately needed change in direction. Happy New Year all (Edited for puncuation and spelling)
Eddie, You said it man !! After all, " Common sense is the LEAST COMMON of all senses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You wax poetic about Common Sense Constitutional but have you ever read it? It's only about 52 pages long, give it a try!
Have you ever read it?Obviously not!Otherwise you would see that Dr.Paul is the only person that has been fighting for what truths it contains.Scroll down.I pasted the Declaration of Independence for a brush up just for your types!READ IT!!!WORD FOR WORD!Then ask yourself who has a platform that best defends its contents!
What kind of Doctor does Ron Paul think he is? Refusing to accept medicare and medicaid as payment--but instead treating those patients and anyone who was poor for free---at his own expense? Who does he thinks he is caring for a black man's wife (for free) when the rest of the hospital refuses? He is a doctor who cares---one who doesn't see us as special or give us attention based on the "group" that we come from, but because of our common humanity. Dr. Ron Paul: a fighter for each person, not for each group. (a.k.a. he's racist)
I'm glad Ron Paul is standing by his Libraterian beliefs. I hope he stays true to his ideas and keeps defending them. Flip-floppers like Romney have no room to attack Paul for defending his ideas. ronpaulforliberty.info is a good site for those still deciding who to vote for.
Paul is an Isolationist. His views on the role of the Federal Government are too radical. Granted Iraq was a gross mistake, abet an intentional one by the Bush Administration to "correct" what Bush II viewed as an incomplete job by Bush I, planning for which began within 3 months of his taking office. There is a major difference between avoiding gross mistakes such as Iraq, and isolationism. Electing Paul would be just another gross mistake, in the other direction. The world is much too complex for the simplistic approach to foreign policy that Paul would attempt to implement.
Exellent post, ATC333. Ron Paul claims he'll keep us safe by "nonintervention" a cowards word for Isolationism. Rome tried this in ancient times, with the Huns, it turned out to be a major factor in their downfall. The worlds governments, headed at the time by Neville Chamberlian, also tried appeasement with Hitler.
That little mistake cost over 50 Million people their lives!
Winston Churchill may have said it best, "An appeaser is one who feeds the Crocodile, hoping it eats him last" George Washington explained they way to insure peace "...If we desire to secure peace,...it must be known, that we are at all times ready for war"
The world is much too complex for our current foreign policy! that is why people support Ron Paul! You use George Washington's quote to actually support Ron Pauls message. We are currently not ready for war ( Spread to thin ) We would be more ready if we bring it all home to defend our borders. "Ready for War" , all we do is start them. You say that Iraq was a mistake and you are correct. Maybe in good time thru education and a history lesson or 2 , you will learn that the rest were also a mistake !! Partially correct , but mostly Wrong !!
Geeze! Your ego knows no bounds does it Constitutionalbacker?????
Ok ted.If you think that the fall of Rome was due to the Huns?You sir are seriously misguided.The reasons that Rome/catholic church failed.Was because of greed and religious isolationism!Nothing more.Stop listening to the heritage foundation for your history lessons!Rome tried exactly what we are doing now.Conquering the world.They spread themselves so thin (militarily)that there was nobody to protect itself from domestic upheaval.Those who don't remember history(factually that is not biased accounts) are doomed to repeat it!If you believe in freedom life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.Then you would vote for WHOEVER best defends the CONSTITUTION!Not who is most electable or who has the best soundbytes.Maybe this will help you.It is a silly little document written by an isolationist radical named Thomas Jefferson.(Oh and read it word for word,then tell me who best represents its views)
The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
WOW, livefree, you Paul supporters certainly aren't short on ego are you? I've read the Declaration, the Constitution, and the Federalist Papers each many, many times over the years. I even carry a copy with me whereever I go and have provided many of my aquaintences with dozens of copies! I've also read volumes of corespondence between the Founders and even Abigale and Thomas. Taken as a whole, everything in context with the contempoary environment, It seems clear what decision they would make here. There would surly be lively discussion between them, particularly between Jefferson and Adams!
Artical 1 Section 8, Clause 1, particularly in refference to the Letters of Marque, seems a fairly pro-active approch to National Defence, given the times!
And exactly where does it say we should let foreign banks print our money?Oh yea It DOESN"T!Where exactly does it say we are to invade countries with out Congress?IT DOESN"T!Thomas Jefferson was the biggest critic of a big government.I could cut and paste his quotes all day about how a Federal Government is not fruitful to a free society.
Also just because you supposedly carry a copy of the document doesn't measn you understand its virtues and principles!Thats like saying "I carry a bible with me,so therefore I am more in touch with GOD than those who don't carry it"It is not the act of carrying it it is the act of understanding its principles.Talk about ego!
I don't know I'm beginning to believe that if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination he would also win the Presidential race. Lets face it from what I see all the other candidates have to throw at him is garbage charges; nothing concrete.
On the other hand every other candidate out there offers nothing concrete in respect as to how they are going to turn/fix the economy. While at the same time they've all got all kinds of unsavory baggage they're hauling around with them; none the least of which is they were at the helm when the ""economy"" hit the proverbial fan.
As for Obama, as much as most of his supporter are want to admit, he has a failed Presidency. Yes he inherited an economy that whether the past administration, and the GOP, admit to or not was their fault. His problem is and was that he got nothing done; and for the majority of his administration he only made things worse.
OottRascals,
No...Obama has not failed. Republicans have failed at delivering economic growth as promised from Coporate tax cuts in 2001 with free market deregulation. We see what it delivered, economically, in 2009. You're dreaming delusionally, Pal. In comparison to where we were, economically, in 2008 versus now. Obama has succeeded.............to your despair.....Mr. Republican.
Tonytellsthetruth,
You proceed from a mistaken assumption... That however does not negate that your charge of my delusionality, is based on your faulty supposition. It also exposes your argument as being politically biased. From what I see on your response you either do not see or fail to recognize that Obama and the Democratic party entered Washington and the office of the Presidency with the backing to get things turned around. Instead they squandered it on political ideological in fighting while trying to force mandatory public expenditures on the American working class.
I have always defend Paul as someone with whom I disagreed on many things but was the only candidate, with the possible exception of Huntsman, with true integrity. His racially biased newsletters changed that, particularly after he made the unbelievable statement that not only did he not write them (possible) but he never even saw them before, even though they appeared above his name/signature. I believe he's lying. I have issues with the acts and the lies to cover it up, as well as his petulance when he was called on it. In short, I lost all respect for Mr. Paul.
Do you retain respect for the other flip flop flavor of the week?Are you saying that a man who delivered over 4000 babies(many for free white,black,and hispanic) is a racist?Do you hold the publisher of newspapers to the same regard and disdain?How bout Rush's racist tirades?Or Becks?If you are comparing dems to repubs,you are comparing a dog turd to a cat turd!They are both just that turds!!!!!
Neither Rush, nor Beck are asking for my vote to be President of The United States!
No but all the other candidates running have flip flopped on their issues.Everyone except RON PAUL!Think for yourself stop being a puppet of the media!
It is "talking with our enemies" within the Afghanistan war theater that allowed us to obtain information about the exact where abouts of Osama Bin Laden leading to his capture and death when it happened.
If we had exited from Afghanistan, before Bin laden's capture, or never invaded Afghanistan, as Paul or the GOP claims, we would have never captured Bin Laden when we did (both Paul and other GOP points are wrong). This is precisely why the GOP FAILED to capture Bin Laden. They were more preoccupied with utilizing our men and women in the Armed Forces for Colonialism operations within territories only having natural resources to benefit Oil Coporations and Contractors. This is solely what dictates GOP foreign policy...........period. And.... that is NOT how to fight terrorism effectively. This is why the GOP will always be a FAILURE at fighting terrorism effectively.
Ron Paul would lose against Obama.....period. Romney would have the best results against Obama....but still lose.
I would like to see Ron Paul defend his newsletters and the book he wrote. If he says he didn't know what was in them, then I would want to know why he did not know what was in them. I have always believed Ron Paul and his son Rand Paul are racist and always will be. Just a pair of lowlifes.
I'm copying and pasting my own response in another seed. I posted it this morning and don't have the time or energy to write more, besides the fact that I have to go to work. Ron Paul is an insider who knows what's going on and he's also the only one who is attempting to educate us, wake us up. Like I said here, if you don't support him, I can appreciate it, but to discredit him and smear him is totally ludicrous. The sneering hatred-filled bipartisanship is not tearing this Country apart, it's already in tatters, but what it is doing is preventing us from pulling it back together. Hate mongering and fear mongering have replaced patriotism, bravery and a sense of pride. We're spoiled brats who don't want Mommy and Daddy to put us out of the house so we can become responsible adults. It's time to grow up kids, Mommy and Daddy are tired and more to the point, broke.
Sparrow-2863685,
Partisanship, in 2012, is not the issue up for discussion. The issue becomes who the BEST for the job is.....period. There will be choices. All choices opposing Obama sing the same "song" in different "keys". The song of NO taxes for Millionaires/Billionaires and deregulation. The other "song" in one key becoming, we must all do our part, together. You talk a good game about unity through bi-partisanship....but Ron Paul clearly misses the unity "mark" with historical ties to racism and a deeply held belief for no regulation, hypothetically ensuring responsibility. Except, History defines no regulation, as preceeding greater corruption and the decline of civilization. Those who do not know history ( or conveniantly forget it) are condemned to repeat it. It happened to all great civilizations like Rome. Ron Pauls argument is to deregulate now because it will eventually happen later, supposedly. It really parrallels the argument of a teenager claiming for a drink of alcohol as a minor because they will eventually drink later, anyway. Ron Paul's argument is ludicrous.....not anyone proclaiming he is NOT fit to be President at 76 years old. Which would make him 84 after an 8 year term. Regardless of your likes or dislikes about the man......he is NOT fit to be President....and he will lose. He's an Extremist with no valid argument once you look closely at his ansers..
I obviously, respectfully disagree.
Sparrow-2863685,
Respectfully, the way you have NO explanation to support any valid rationale for Ron Paul or a Rand Paul policy argument shows the same problem they have with the majority of America's voters about rationale for their extreme positions. The same way you cannot propose a valid rationale for their policies remains the reason they have lack of any rational explanation to America, as whole.
Freedom is NOT exclusion of any individual from rules of any knid.....Freedom is the independance an individual has attained after playing by the rules ALL equally play by......
Ron Paul's positions are going to bite him on the a$$ in the end.....you will see......
Stock up on your Kleenex supply for December 2012.
Which extreme positions, specifically?
For example, refer to his policy discussed and critqued in blog entry #21....
For example, refer to his policy against the department of education...when he himself seeked education, as a Doctor.
For example, refer to his tax policies for Millionaires/Billionaires.........
Do you mean your partisan rant? The one you had before you told ME that partisanship is not the issue here?
I'm glad you have a crystal ball and can see what WOULD have happened had Ron Paul's policies been in place. But, since it's a bit more complicated than me just flat out stating that I KNOW, I'll have to say that none of us will EVER know, since it's a moot point. I could venture a few guesses, but it wouldn't exactly be honest, since I don't really know. What I DO know is that it took over 11 years, 3,000 American and almost 20,000 Afghan casualties and he was found in Pakistan. And it was the GOP that took us there to begin. Seems to me that if a Democratic President would have been sitting at the time, the invasion probably wouldn't have taken place, so your point is pointless.
Eliminate the Department of Education. He "seeked" education? Last time I checked, the past tense of seek was "sought", but I digress. He certainly did seek education and his wife worked to PAY for it. Do you think if the there's no federal involvement that the schools will close? On the contrary, they will flourish when they have competition and will have to drop prices to affordable levels. Do you think it's working as it currently stands? We have federal programs, which means they're all grabbing for federal monies. If those monies disappear, then I guess they'll have to get back to actually EDUCATING again, what a novel idea! I could get into a very long, detailed discussion of exactly where the tax dollars are going now and believe me, it's not toward educating. Unfortunately, it will have to wait because I don't plan on spending the remainder of this year trying to educate you. I have more fun things to do right now.
His tax policies for millionaires/billionaires? How about his tax policies across the board? Why do we have to limit it to the richest?
He wants to repeal the unconstitutional 16th amendment and eliminate the federal income, estate and gift taxes, period.
Happy New Year!
Eliminating the Dept of Eduction is sound logic. Having a tiny agency totally detached from the taxpayers and their children make education decisions makes as much sense as have someone in Washington raise your children because they think they can do a better job.
Not to mention there is absolutely no way to measure success or failure of any federal agency because there is no competition and they purposely do not present ANY efficiency audits. The plans to run the education of 300 million legal residents is decided by a handful of people NOT elected and not presenting any type of agenda/plan presented to the people. It is never made known what the priorities were of the person "appointing" the people in charge of the federal agency. There are all kinds of party or politician favors etc involved in such appointments. Most upper level appointments are solely based on past campaign efforts.
Regarding the "millionaires" both parties are supported almost 50/50 right down the line by the wealthiest corporations and individuals. There are only minor differences between the parties as far as lobby money taken and the subsequent "support" for those people.
People are so ignorant they believe both party's are still in the same left/right paradigm that ended in the late 1960's right after JFK was shot and Vietnam ended. Since then it has been a harmonious blend of the two parties perfectly exampled in the absolute seamless corporate bailouts handed from Bush to Obama. They both signed every single bailout put in front of them as well as adding their own personal favorite lobby's to be given lifeboat seats on the Titanic while the taxpayers sink like a rock.
They have together become the Fascist progresso-rhino party.
Well, I don't have to say much more, thank you very much! I appreciate the time you saved me. I have some to add, but I'm not spending the night on here, better things to be doing. Happy New Year Adams!
I think you are missing the point about THE CONSTITUTION is what made us the most respected nation in the world.Now the "military industrial complex" seeks to rule our nation.Not the CONSTITUTION!Heres another Eisenhower quote for ya.
How far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without?
LouisCKforPresident dot com