Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Top 8 Reasons Ron Paul Is an Abomination Who Should Be Cast Out of Decent Society
David Horowitz's NewsReal Blog ^ | Calvin Freiburger

Posted on 10/17/2010 9:21:36 AM PDT by Michael van der Galien

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last
To: JLS
Actually, they are what "Republican" used to mean. Look up the views of "Mr. Republican" and you'll find that they are more in line with Dr. Paul than with many of those who claim to be "conservative" or "Republican" these days.

I agree with you...we must defeat the liberals in Congress across the board.

61 posted on 10/17/2010 6:30:48 PM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Tell me: who did you vote for in the 2008 presidential primary?


62 posted on 10/17/2010 7:47:46 PM PDT by conimbricenses (Red means run son, numbers add up to nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: conimbricenses

You’re wasting time, and missing the point. It’s silly to count how many flaws you can find in someone I voted for int he past.

Focus on what principles need to be advanced, and vote for the candidate who has the greatest loyalty to those principles. This counts Ron Paul out, for me. By a long shot.

No reasonable conservative would argue against the principles of common sense, constitutional conservatism.

Ron Paul is not a reasonable conservative. At best, he’s a politician who thinks he’s a constitutionalist while in reality he uses his own principles against himself.


63 posted on 10/17/2010 7:57:44 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Rules will never work for radicals (liberals) because they seek chaos. And don't even know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
So in other words, you will not answer a simple question about who you voted for in the 2008 primary because you know that person is guilty of the same things you accuse Paul of being a "fraud" over, and probably far more so.

Thank you for proving though that you argue not from a rational position, but from a bizarre and inconsistently applied personal fixation on Paul.

64 posted on 10/17/2010 8:09:23 PM PDT by conimbricenses (Red means run son, numbers add up to nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: truthfreedom
"Gulf War I - normal Republican foreign policy"

A better description would be Realist Foreign Policy or Pragmatic Foreign Policy.

GHW Bush had Realists and NeoCons but the Realists were dominant. James Baker at State, Scowcroft at NSA and his deputy was Gates. Powell as Joint Chief. And Scowcroft brought Condi Rice along. All the NeoCons were congregated in the Defense Dept under Cheney: Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Libby, etc. There has been speculation of how that might have turned out different had Bush been able to get John Tower confirmed as SecDef.

The NeoCons and the Realists agreed on Desert Storm. The NeoCons wanted to go on to Baghdad but the Realists said no.

The Powell Doctrine was composed prior to Desert Storm and the Wolfowitz Doctrine was composed afterwords and leaked to the press in 1992. Incidentally, Obama invoked the Powell Doctrine last year for Afghanistan.

The Wolfowitz Doctrine was expanded into what most refer to as the NeoCon Doctrine that was enshrined at PNAC in 1998.

Then, under GW Bush the Realists were kicked aside and the NeoCons ran the show until the Iraq Study Group was convened and the power gradually shifted back to the Realists.

Let me suggest to you that Condi Rice's recent visit with Obama was to demonstrate that, even though Realist James Jones resigned as NSA, the Realists are still running Obama's foreign policy.

65 posted on 10/17/2010 8:41:07 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144

The globalist war wing of the Republican party hates Paul. That is centrally what this is about.

Budget cuts are coming up and the war wing is worried that many agree with Paul’s call to change the size and mission of our military and homeland “security.”

We have all witnessed “homeland security” turn on Americans in the name of the NWO/political correctness (constitutonalists, gun owners, Christians and Vets on the list of domestic terrorists), political correctness (searching grandma at the airports while pretending everyone is an equal risk of being a terrorist). We have seen them install disgustingly unconstitutional National spy programs and airport body scanning machines due to budget/expanionism. We have seen homeland security equip and re-train our community police officers into an occupying paramilitary force and they are abusing the dignity and rights of Americans out in the open while homeland security sneaks around abusing us undercover.

Although conservatives support our troops, many are upset with the loss of American life in Afghanistan under Obama’s rules of engagement; rules of death to America. We saw it before in Viet Nam when the left loves our enemy more than the the US and despises the lives of our troops. Although we support security in our homeland, we have witnessed these organizations turn against Americans while leaving the borders wide open to Muslim terrorists, Chi-com and Russian spies and Mexican drug lords. Homeland security is not serious about securing the homeland but is very serious about harassing Americans and stripping us of protected freedom without cause.

All this needs to be constantly debated and mindless head nodding with the globalist war wing of the Republican party is not a good thing for constitutional freedom and human life. Ron Paul is kooky in many ways but people like him are a necessary challenge to the policies and actions of the war wing of the Republican party.


66 posted on 10/18/2010 6:21:07 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: conimbricenses

I volunteered for the Thompson campaign.

You have no argument, based on what I’ve already told you.


67 posted on 10/18/2010 5:59:49 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Rules will never work for radicals (liberals) because they seek chaos. And don't even know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson