Posted on 12/15/2011 5:36:46 PM PST by writer33
With all the fawning over Ron Paul and his fiscal policy, it isn’t just fiscal policy that makes an effective President of the United States. It also takes sound foreign policy. So, we want to know what you think of Ron Paul’s worldview and how that worldview may affect the role of the United States of America in the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at therightelectivedecisions.wordpress.com ...
Yes - because he is not realistic about almost anything. In the debate, he just equated “welfare spending” with “warfare spending” in a very cynical comparison that is not based on reality and not squared with the document he claims to respect so very much: The Constitution.
He is not the quirky ole grampa who sticks to principles. He’s a politician in the worst sense of the word in so many ways.
Yes, they all are, but somehow folks give him a pass on this due to his quirkiness. They shouldn’t.
Does anybody else see anything wrong with our current foreign policy?
Paul gets a pass by so many because they project on him who they think he is not who he actually is.
Even if you provide written words and videos they will dismiss them or spin what has been said.
Paul has dangerous foreign policy ideas which makes him dangerous.
LOL! Thanks for the graphic, ss.
At this point, I’m voting for Paul. But yes, his foreign policy is askew.
It may well be dangerous. What could be more dangerous than allowing bureaucrats to arrest citizens on a whim ,with no rights?.....umm nothing,PERIOD. Bush would have signed it along with Newt and Mitt. Maybe a Ron Paul would tilt the balance in the correct direction on civil liberties. This is where the Republicans have dropped the ball.
I disagree. For one thing, we weren't totally isolationist in the 1930s. FDR tried every trick he could think of to entangle us in the war over conservative opposition until the Japanese finally took the bait.
Secondly, as far as isolation went, it was a great success for the USA. We were the last power to enter the war and thus we emerged from the war as the world's true superpower.
It's sad that most conservative now are more in step with FDR's mindset than Robert Taft's.
I suggest you read Chernow’s bio on Alexander Hammilton. You would see it in context.
I believe the founders would be appalled at the us having permanent military presence in (I read) more than 100 countries. 800 bases. The Roman empire only had 37.
Why, exactly, is Ron Paul dangerous? I’m not a Ron Paul supporter, nor am I against him, but why all the sock puppetry? I see some really extreme positions against him her on FR and I’m not sure it has really been explained.
Yes, his policy is the mark of a complete idiot.
Every time I see Paul, the crazier he appears. Tonight was no exception. It is clear the dope smoking support has to be the main issue of his cult because nobody sober could support that kook.
Ronny Jew hating Paul is the Earmark King of Congress.
Ron demanded 134,000,000 in earmarks in 2009 !
And was only one of four GOP reps who refused to sign the earmark ban!
So you support the Pork King of congress????
So your a
9-11 truther
Blame the murder victims of 9-11 and the US
For 9-11
Hate Israel
Support Iran getting the bomb
Support Code Pink
Love Earmarks In the millions
Hate the GOP ban on earmarks
Love the terrorist flotilla against Israel
Well that’s Ron Paul !
Congress would never take the foreign policy too the level Paul would desire. On the other hand he might get at least half of it done like cleaning up the State Department which would be a good thing.
Many issues we do make worse like sticking our nose into Israels business. If we let Israel be a lot of the M.E. thugs would be handled. As it stands today every time Israel tries to act in it's own defense in flies the Sec of State saying No No you can't do that.
It was Reagan who stood by and let Israel hit Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. Sometimes the wise policy is too do nothing. Until we get our military rebuilt we can not afford much more.
Who are you trying to fool here !
Jew hate Ron supports Irna getting the bomb!
Ronny is a 9-11 truther.
Are you ?
Under a not very strict interpretation of the Constitution, and limitation of Federal powers, we would not have to worry about ANY MAN attaining the seat of President. As it is, ANY MAN is a danger. Under that scenario, who would be most likely to live within the constraints of Supreme court and Congressional checks. Answer is, Ron Paul. If we want a truly limited, much smaller government, Ron Paul is the only one to entrust with this position.
I'm not opposed to earmarks. I'm opposed to the abuse of earmarks. Some of our best weapons systems were funded by earmarks when the leaders refused to put them in the budget. I'm not a Paul supporter though. I do agree that our country shouldn't be permanently in over 100 other countries.
FDR’s tricks included using US servicemen flying Chinese marked American planes, to attack Japan BEFORE Pearl Harbor. The Flying Tigers, may have been the trigger for the attack on December 7th. Believe it.........or not.
I agree with Paul on many things.
Hoever, Iran is run by religious fanatics. They are different than the soviets who had lost millions in the war. Mutually Assured Destruction worked for the cold war, but I don’;t trust the concept with government whose leaders believe they have a moral responsibility to bring about the end of the world.
When protecting our country and our allies, I believe we should take threats at face value.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.