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

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Is A Crackpot
Youtube ^ | August 11, 2011 | Chatter4

Posted on 08/13/2011 10:01:23 AM PDT by chatter4

Great video, well worth hearing. Ron Paul's remarks about Iran, followed by commentaries of Levin, Rush and Beck all in one place.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Government; History; Politics
KEYWORDS: 911truther; congress; elections; libertarians; obama; randpaultruthfile; rimjob; ronpaul; ronpaultruthfile; talkradio; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-274 next last
To: Lorianne; lormand; Allegra; SaraJohnson; Tax-chick; fieldmarshaldj
You are missing the point. While Ron Paul sees the 10th Amendment as banning federal prohibitions of abortion or sexual perversion posing as marriage while posing for holy pictures as a pro-lifer and pro-family guy (sucker bait for pro-lifers and pro-family folks), SCOTUS and the court system disagree with him or ignore his claim and keep cramming social revolution, abortion, perversion posing as marriage, and a cornucopia of other evils down our throats.

Unlike Ron Paul, I really DO want to end abortion and these other perversions posing as marriage. You deal with the system you have. You cannot tie both of our hands and both of our feet behind our backs while arming the social revolutionaries with the political/SCOTUS equivalent of nukes.

On the 10th, Paulie wants us restrained by it and our enemies empowered by it. He is blatantly dishonest as usual to describe his delusions in such a way as to call himself pro-life. I want a centralized government on foreign policy, trade, military policy and a bunch of other things. So did the Founders. Also bear in mind that the Founders were remarkable men but they did not have a crystal ball to see the specific circumstances of our time. I doubt that their wildest imaginations would have foreseen legalized abortion at all much less on demand or "marriage" of Adam and Bruce or genuflecting before Al Qaeda for that matter and they certainly did not write a constitution to guarantee as legal rights such evil insanity. (There I go again!!! I am SOOOOO judgmental! You betcha!)

Ron Paul is an airhead who appeals to the "I gotta be me" crowd and he is a dishonest airhead or the least mentally capable article in shoe leather in the entire American gummint.

Maybe we SHOULD elect someone to change the direction of gummint and stop the social revolution but it is a lead pipe cinch that the someone is not the Galveston porkmeister, selective 10th Amendment social revolutionary poseur and surrendermonkey.

You either believe in the obvious truth or you don't but YOU can't have it both ways. I am a recovering attorney. I represented without fee 1100 people arrested (most on felony charges) for sitting in at abortion mills, desterilizing the instruments, pouring raw eggs into the suction machines. About 30 were convicted, mostly of the non-criminal equivalent of parking tickets (infractions) and none of felonies. I absolutely resent Ron Paul's rank dishonesty on the pro-life issue. I don't care about his personal opinions. I care about his ACTIONS as a public official. He wants to play philosopher king while another 50 million babies are slaughtered and counting. He is a rank phony. Paul hides behind the 10th Amendment and SCOTUS in Roe vs. Wade hid behind the 9th Amendment. Those two amendments have generally been ignored for over 200 years except to facilitate baby-killing and perversion. NO THANKS!

If the little twerp REALLY wants to defend the 10th Amendment consistently, he would have to advocate the complete abolition of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and about 95% of the federal government's programs. However nice an idea that might seem to many conservatives as to many fedgov programs, if paleoPaulie were candid and honest, the voting public would stomp his sorry backside into the dustbin of history. Paul's sophomoric nonsense may just thrill the college kiddies who support him since he seems to promise legal drugs, sex however they please with whomever or whatever they please in whatever numbers, abortion to keep their life options open without forgoing sex until marriage, no personal responsibility just a cornucopia of "rights" subsidized by others and no more of those just icky wars that make their empty little heads hurt and no more bills for same.

For nearly fifty years, I have been a movement conservative. I have never seen such a disgrace as Ron Paul sullying the name of the movement by calling himself conservative. He is a libertarian and not a conservative and he makes it up as he goes along. I was a Libertarian Party State officer as a college kid back before we invented the wheel but then I grew up. He is 76 and by 2016 he will be eighty. He has never grown up. Maybe he can be packed off to Sunnyvale Farm in a straitjacket by 2016. You well know that he will NEVER be POTUS.

201 posted on 08/14/2011 11:14:33 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Burn 'em Bright!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

Amen...I could not have said it better re Ron Paul. Keep it up. Libertarians are would be anarchists.


202 posted on 08/14/2011 11:24:40 PM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a tea party descendant - steeped in the Constitutional legacy handed down by the Founders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
Why is it suddenly bad that they’re considering Paul?

Paul's not going to get the nomination.

So then who will these college kids vote for?

Likely a write-in or a third party.

In other words, Obama.

203 posted on 08/14/2011 11:46:50 PM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Allegra
Unfortunately, these college age kids make up a large portion of the potential Republican voters.

A lot of them are listening to Ron Paul & not the conventional Republican message.

So when Ron Paul quits they will all vote third party or stay home because the Republican party never reached out them.

The Republican youth effort has been terrible for years and this is the result.
204 posted on 08/14/2011 11:54:52 PM PDT by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland
Actually, we have nothing to fear from China, except them not buying our debt.

The military threat from them is regional.

The US doesn't need to be the defender of the world.

205 posted on 08/15/2011 3:48:40 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (When the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn (Pr.29:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
No doubt, but the US cannot do much to stop it!

There was a great fear when the Indians and Paki's got the bomb as well, but they have kept each other in check so far.

206 posted on 08/15/2011 3:50:09 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (When the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn (Pr.29:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
What about the N.Koreans?

Who wants them with a nuke as well?

But the fact is, we have very little we can do.

China may be able to do more then we can regarding N.Korea.

207 posted on 08/15/2011 3:52:01 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (When the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn (Pr.29:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
Why don't you read what Washington had to say, before you intone on its relevance. It was extremely relevant, and was not at all as you suggest. Nor, certainly, am I!

No one is suggesting that we should not maintain our nuclear arsenal; no one is suggesting that we should not continue to develop the most advanced weapons systems on earth; no one is suggesting that we should not have gone after Al Qaeda, after they repeatedly struck at us. As Jefferson wrote in a memo to General Washington, in 1793, we should "punish the first insult." Jefferson applied this to the Barbary Pirates, very effectively.

But while we deal with out enemies from a position of strength; and retaliate for any mischief; there is nothing in that which extrapolates to trying to treat other peoples as the British treated the Irish--a terrible mistake that has been harmful to both Nations--by trying to make them into something else.

Your abusive comments about Dr. Paul add nothing to your argument, which to the extent of calling for strength, I would concur with. To the extent, however that it looks towards permanent antagonisms, it is something quite different. You mention Patton, who was not only a great warrior, but like Washington against some of what you seem to advocate.

You also seem to have a disproportionate focus on Iran. Surely the hostage crisis of 1979 & 1980, does not quite measure up to the actual war that we had with North Korea; with the continued provocations by North Korea, today. Nor do Iranian nuclear developments pose the threat of North Korea's actual nuclear arsenal + superior rockets. It strikes me that you are doing precisely what Washington warned against, and that is letting your foreign policy views by driven by your own like & dislikes.

Again, read what Washington actually said. It is extremely relevant to what is going on today. (Washington/Bush Debate on Foreign Policy.)

William Flax

208 posted on 08/15/2011 9:41:53 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan

Every quote in history by every person how ever lived will not change the fact that Ron Paul is a crackpot. Nutty little libertaian crackpot.


209 posted on 08/15/2011 9:47:41 AM PDT by Moby Grape (Formerly Impeach the Boy...name change necessary after the Marxist won)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Allegra
Paul's not going to get the nomination.

Probably not. His age is certainly against him. But he came in a very close second in the Iowa straw polls, over the weekend. It is absolutely idiotic for those claiming to be Conservative Republicans to be insulting 27.6% of the most active Republicans in an at least moderately Conservative State, by the comments some are making on this thread.

And by the way. While Dr. Paul, despite his age, does appeal to campus Conservatives, for all the right reasons; there were very few of them visible in the C-Span coverage of the Iowa meeting. The fact that Paul--if he should make it on to the ticket--would bring a lot of non-aligned youth into the Republican Party is a net plus.

This thread, however, is totally counter-productive. In stead of focusing on Obama, many here are focused on a terribly destructive inter-family feud, which does nothing worthwhile to meeting the real threats to the American future.

William Flax

210 posted on 08/15/2011 9:56:59 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Moby Grape
Your name calling is not an argument; nor does it contribute to any worthwhile purpose, whatsoever. It makes you appear to be bitter or agenda driven, but not rational.

The man has been overwhelmingly reelected in his district, repeatedly. He has one of the most consistent voting records of anyone in the past generation in Congress. He votes against all of the things that most Conservatives question. He is respected among Conservative economists as a sound foe of Keynesian folly. His record is as commendable as your slander is ridiculous.

Obama, on the other hand, is a crackpot demagogue. Why would you attack Ron Paul, rather than Obama, if you need to denounce someone?

William Flax

211 posted on 08/15/2011 10:04:01 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

Only if the Republican party is too stupid and won’t capitalize on Paul’s bi-partisan appeal and not nominate him.

Which means you are right.


212 posted on 08/15/2011 2:18:23 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
So, all of us who are less than enamored of Ron Paul are "stupid?"

LOL - that's what I love about the Paulbots.

213 posted on 08/15/2011 2:21:51 PM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
After we have finished destroying Ron Paul and his paleopeacecreep delusions as to foreign and military policy, perhaps, you will return to political relevance nor perhaps you will become a Democrat on other issues.

Iran should be treated as we treated the Japanese High Command after WWII. Ahmadinejad: hanged by the neck until dead. The offending mullahs likewise. Even Eisenhower did not tolerated Mossagh Dagh taking over Iran. We did not nation build or direct the Shah as to how to govern. He was happy to be our friend and understood tye consequences if he were not. If we had not had a succession of Nixon/Kissinger, Feckless Ford, and followed by Spineless Carter (taking out Reza Pahlevi from the Peacock Throne in favor of the lunatics), we would have a lot fewer problems in the Islamofascist world. In foreign and military policy, Ron Paul is nothing but a Carter wannabe without Naval Academy the degree in nuclear physics. This cowardly excuse for foreign policy did not work for Neville Chamberlain or for his American counterparts (America Firster isolationist nincompoops who folded their collective tent after their stupidity was rewarded with Pearl Harbor destruction). FDR refused to allow oil to the Japanese war machine and the attack on Pearl Harbor followed almost immediately. They had been given aid and comfort by the paleopeacecreep crowd whyining against a manly foreign policy and demanding opportunities for profits from trade to arm our enemies.

As to my disagreements with Washington's expressed beliefs in this nation's impotent infancy when Kumbaya made more sense than an interventionist stance as it has not since about 1820, I will be sure to take it up with him personally if I meet him in the hereafter. If he does not know what happened in the 215 years or so since his death to make for a verrrrry changed foreign policy among the sane, I will be sure to fill him in.

Be sure to get paleoPaulie to get back to us if and when Israel or the first American city are nuked by Ahmadinejad or his ilk. Oh, there I go again, abusing poor Ahmadinejad for publicly promising to nuke Israel and us and poor, poor misunderstood paleoPaulie for his eagerness to serve Ahmadinejad's cause or your and his appalling naivete in refusing to recognize threats to the US.

A more contemporary source of occasional wisdom in a despicable cause was Lenin who accurately predicted that when America was to be hanged, her businessmen would be eager to profit from selling the rope. That is, in a nutshell (paleoPaulie should pardon the expression) essentially the paleoisolationist/pacifist foreign "policy."

As to Patton, wasn't he the magnificent field commander who angered Eisenhower and FDR by speaking openly of his desire to use the existing army in Europe to invade and conquer the soviets??? Whatever differences I may have with his memory (his belief in reincarnation or whatever) are not on that score.

If the early peace enthusiasts (far better men than paleoPaulie, each and every one, however defective until Pearl Harbor) of America First whom you and I well know are paleoPaulie's role models (until mugged by reality and the Japanese High Command), including Charles Lindbergh, Cyrus McCormack and John Flynn, could learn from their despicable errors at the cost of the lives of the crews of USS Arizona, Maryland, Texas and soooo many other American warships, you and Paulie are luckier. You can read about Pearl Harbor (and Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the Islamofascist intended fate for Western Civilization, the United States, Israel, Christianity and Judaism) and change your minds before a nuclear Pearl Harbor.

Since Bush and Washington were hardly contemporaries and had never actually debated, I am not interested at all in fairy tales of the, ummmm, "peace community" taking both out of context to make paleoweenie points.

I grew up in New Haven, Connecticut and lived in its immediate vicinity for many years until moving to rural Illinois a little over a decade ago. John Flynn was the editor of the then quite conservative New Haven Register owned by John Day Jackson. I respect Flynn (Executive Director of America First) and a benefactor of the local college I attended for his honesty in admitting the errors of America First. I respect him for his accomplishments and not for his early foreign policy blunders. I can respect Ron Paul's expressed views on many non-military and non-foreign policy issues. I can despise him simultaneously for being a serial liar as to being a pro-lifer (effectively in public policy)n while hiding behind the skirts of the long-dead 10th Amendment and for a wide variety of other rank dishonesties. This is not abuse but rational evaluation of the crackpot who is Ron Paul. He will be no more missed than was Harold Stassen.

214 posted on 08/15/2011 5:10:08 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Burn 'em Bright!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
After we have finished destroying Ron Paul and his paleopeacecreep delusions as to foreign and military policy, perhaps, you will return to political relevance nor perhaps you will become a Democrat on other issues.

Iran should be treated as we treated the Japanese High Command after WWII. Ahmadinejad: hanged by the neck until dead. The offending mullahs likewise. Even Eisenhower did not tolerated Mossagh Dagh taking over Iran. We did not nation build or direct the Shah as to how to govern. He was happy to be our friend and understood tye consequences if he were not. If we had not had a succession of Nixon/Kissinger, Feckless Ford, and followed by Spineless Carter (taking out Reza Pahlevi from the Peacock Throne in favor of the lunatics), we would have a lot fewer problems in the Islamofascist world. In foreign and military policy, Ron Paul is nothing but a Carter wannabe without Naval Academy the degree in nuclear physics. This cowardly excuse for foreign policy did not work for Neville Chamberlain or for his American counterparts (America Firster isolationist nincompoops who folded their collective tent after their stupidity was rewarded with Pearl Harbor destruction). FDR refused to allow oil to the Japanese war machine and the attack on Pearl Harbor followed almost immediately. They had been given aid and comfort by the paleopeacecreep crowd whyining against a manly foreign policy and demanding opportunities for profits from trade to arm our enemies.

As to my disagreements with Washington's expressed beliefs in this nation's impotent infancy when Kumbaya made more sense than an interventionist stance as it has not since about 1820, I will be sure to take it up with him personally if I meet him in the hereafter. If he does not know what happened in the 215 years or so since his death to make for a verrrrry changed foreign policy among the sane, I will be sure to fill him in.

Be sure to get paleoPaulie to get back to us if and when Israel or the first American city are nuked by Ahmadinejad or his ilk. Oh, there I go again, abusing poor Ahmadinejad for publicly promising to nuke Israel and us and poor, poor misunderstood paleoPaulie for his eagerness to serve Ahmadinejad's cause or your and his appalling naivete in refusing to recognize threats to the US.

A more contemporary source of occasional wisdom in a despicable cause was Lenin who accurately predicted that when America was to be hanged, her businessmen would be eager to profit from selling the rope. That is, in a nutshell (paleoPaulie should pardon the expression) essentially the paleoisolationist/pacifist foreign "policy."

As to Patton, wasn't he the magnificent field commander who angered Eisenhower and FDR by speaking openly of his desire to use the existing army in Europe to invade and conquer the soviets??? Whatever differences I may have with his memory (his belief in reincarnation or whatever) are not on that score.

If the early peace enthusiasts (far better men than paleoPaulie, each and every one, however defective until Pearl Harbor) of America First whom you and I well know are paleoPaulie's role models (until mugged by reality and the Japanese High Command), including Charles Lindbergh, Cyrus McCormack and John Flynn, could learn from their despicable errors at the cost of the lives of the crews of USS Arizona, Maryland, Texas and soooo many other American warships, you and Paulie are luckier. You can read about Pearl Harbor (and Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the Islamofascist intended fate for Western Civilization, the United States, Israel, Christianity and Judaism) and change your minds before a nuclear Pearl Harbor.

Since Bush and Washington were hardly contemporaries and had never actually debated, I am not interested at all in fairy tales of the, ummmm, "peace community" taking both out of context to make paleoweenie points.

I grew up in New Haven, Connecticut and lived in its immediate vicinity for many years until moving to rural Illinois a little over a decade ago. John Flynn was the editor of the then quite conservative New Haven Register owned by John Day Jackson. I respect Flynn (Executive Director of America First) and a benefactor of the local college I attended for his honesty in admitting the errors of America First. I respect him for his accomplishments and not for his early foreign policy blunders. I can respect Ron Paul's expressed views on many non-military and non-foreign policy issues. I can despise him simultaneously for being a serial liar as to being a pro-lifer (effectively in public policy)n while hiding behind the skirts of the long-dead 10th Amendment and for a wide variety of other rank dishonesties. This is not abuse but rational evaluation of the crackpot who is Ron Paul. He will be no more missed than was Harold Stassen.

215 posted on 08/15/2011 5:10:22 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Burn 'em Bright!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

I’m not a Paulbot. I’d rather Palin if she runs.
If she doesn’t, and the Republicans pick someone besides Paul, Obama is a shoe-in.

What I love about idiot Republicans is they’d rather lose to Obama than have a shot with Paul. They did the same with McCain in 08.

Thanks for nothing.


216 posted on 08/15/2011 6:34:44 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
Thanks for nothing.

Uh...you're welcome. (I'll never understand the Paulbots, but I suppose that's a healthy thing...)

At least we agree on one thing. I do like Palin.

I'm not in the tank for any of them right now.

The elction is fifteen months away, for crying out loud.

The situation is still very fluid.

217 posted on 08/15/2011 7:11:20 PM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
His supporters are even worse. Go check out Ron Paul forums and read the slime these people spout - sometimes you’d think you were on DU or Daily KOS.

The current "Ron Paul isn't getting enough MSM love" bitch fest over on Zero Hedge is something to behold. And as with every thread in Paulestine, they have some strong words for them Jews (except Jon Stewart... since he did a sympathetic segment on Paul, he's a good Jew today).

218 posted on 08/15/2011 11:21:12 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: John D

“I hope he runs as a third party candidate. He will only hurt Obama.”

I beg to disagree. My thought is that if he were to run on a third party ticket, he’d be a spoiler for our side just as Perot helped Clinton get elected. Unfortunately, there are quite a few who’d never vote for BHO but would vote for RP. For one thing, his name is linked to the Tea Party in the media and Liberal talking points. (They call him Conservative, plus he ran as Repub last time as well.) So he wouldn’t take any votes away from BHO, but likely would from the Repub candidate. Then, bingo - a second term of BHO because voters who don’t want him will now be split.


219 posted on 08/15/2011 11:43:45 PM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

I just reread your post, and it’s spot-on. RP wouldn’t endorse the Repub nominee even if it were Jesus Christ, because he’s so arrogant he thinks only HE (RP) is pure enough.

I just hate that he’s brainwashed so many kids who don’t know diddly yet, and poisoned them against any good conservatives. He’s spawned blind koolaid drinkers who are no better than those of The Wan.

In fact, he seems to be a player who gets perverse kicks out of all this - just like the games he plays with bills in Congress such that he gets regular, hefty earmarks but can say he always votes “no” to earmarks.

I hope Rick Santorum can hang in there - at least he had the guts to take the “good doctor” on in debate and, despite being treated unfairly and cut short by the moderators, did a fine job of it.


220 posted on 08/16/2011 12:24:13 AM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
As Jefferson wrote in a memo to General Washington, in 1793, we should "punish the first insult." Jefferson applied this to the Barbary Pirates, very effectively.

I'm glad you brought up the Barbary Pirates. It is my understanding that Ron Paul opposes foreign aid on constitutional grounds. In 1791, the President, George Washington; the Vice President, John Adams; and the Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, all approved an act of appropriations by Congress to pay tribute to Morocco.

From the perspective of the Constitution, there is no substantive difference between tribute and aid.

My question to you, or any other Ron Paul supporter is, How can Ron Paul's constitutional argument be tenable in light of this.

221 posted on 08/16/2011 1:26:17 AM PDT by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: John D; All

“He doesn’t, then name something, ANYTHING he has ever actually done, other than talk.”

Yeah - excuse me for jumping in here, but I agree. If he’s really all about the constitution, then there’s something that’s in his power to do as a Congressman: lead the charge in going after this Super Committee lunacy - it’s clearly unconstitutional.


222 posted on 08/16/2011 1:28:38 AM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan; All

“but leave the insulting rhetoric directed at one of the most respected foes of the Obanists, we have, to the career Leftists.”

You know how he could really do his (considerable) part to defeat Obama in ‘12? Endorse the nominee, in the event it’s not him, and all his supporters would follow. We’ll need every vote we can get to end this evil reign of BHO.

Will he do that?


223 posted on 08/16/2011 1:34:51 AM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: llandres
. My thought is that if he were to run on a third party ticket, he’d be a spoiler for our side just as Perot helped Clinton get elected.

Big difference. Perot did not blame America for every problem in the world. He did not demand that under aged girls be allowed to cross state lines in order to get abortions when they are illegal in the state they live. Perot did not want to force the military to accept gays. Perot was not in favor of legalizing drugs.
These are all things the surrender monkey, and most democrats are in favor of. No real Republican could ever vote for someone who thinks killing OBL was bad, but they are things that many liberals who otherwise would vote for the king may like. and instead vote for the anti-American.
224 posted on 08/16/2011 3:15:35 AM PDT by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Question. Serious question. What’s with the Ron Paul, anti-Semitism business? Is there any substance to this notion, or is it a slur? People mention it, but there’s never anything specific - just that he is one. Just curious.


225 posted on 08/16/2011 2:42:46 PM PDT by americanophile ("this absurd theology of an immoral Bedouin, is a rotting corpse which poisons our lives" - Ataturk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

I don’t support Ron Paul for president - never! He’s lost it. :)


226 posted on 08/16/2011 7:01:16 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
There's a big, long, ugly case behind the Ron Paul anti-Semitism business. I can only tell you to start looking at his voting record on matters concerning Israel, his statements and his supporters -- which include anti-Jew legends Don Black (stormfront.org) and David Duke as well as pro-Palestinian crusaders like Cindy Sheehan, Adam Kokesh and Medea Benjamin. Also take a look at his old foreign policy adviser Philip Giraldi. Another titan in the anti-Semite underworld.

I have no idea how Ron Paul feels about Jews personally. I know he has some insane ideas about the state of Israel, the existential threats they face and what they mean to western civilization. And I know that he consistently earns the most passionate anti-Semite support of any candidate not named Barack Hussein.

227 posted on 08/16/2011 8:00:54 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: John D

I hear ya. And I voted for Perot, I confess :-)

Earlier on Bret Baier, the panel was asked about RP and his folks’ latest sqawking about him not getting fair or equal coverage by the media. Krauthammer said that if RP continues to feel slighted, he may very well switch and run as an Independent, which CK said could do significant damage to the Republicans and help BHO.

That’s always been my theory as well. Everyone’s right on here, that he wouldn’t run on the Libertarian ticket again as it’s not taken seriously. BUT it’s quite possible he could go Independent, which IS viewed as viable. A surprising number in Congress are Independents.

I just hope he’ll either stay where he is, or drop out (wishful thinking, I know). What is he trying to prove, anyway, other than helping The WAN?


228 posted on 08/16/2011 8:51:02 PM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Great, thanks!


229 posted on 08/16/2011 10:16:09 PM PDT by americanophile ("this absurd theology of an immoral Bedouin, is a rotting corpse which poisons our lives" - Ataturk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard; americanophile
So whenever a congressman's vote might have a negative impact on any other country, that's because the congressman is racist?

Or in your paranoid mind MUST that be the reason only if the other county happens to be Israel?

What's that matter—you have trouble putting America first?

Perhaps it is you who are prejudiced.

Prejudiced in favor of Israel, a foreign nation.

And prejudiced against America.

230 posted on 08/17/2011 10:08:13 AM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: llandres; John D; crghill; Lorianne

“Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) was virtually ignored by the mainstream media after coming in a close second in the Iowa straw poll over the weekend.”

Video: http://timiacono.com/index.php/2011/08/16/the-invisible-tea-party-patient-zero/


231 posted on 08/17/2011 10:18:36 AM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: crghill

There are a lot more unwritten rules than that here.


232 posted on 08/17/2011 10:25:50 AM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

“- if Ron Paul is supposed to be a Republican yet won’t even endorse the eventual nominee of his own party, what good is he?”

Have the other Republican candidates been asked the same question ... “If Ron Paul wins the Repbulican nomination will you endorse him?”


233 posted on 08/17/2011 10:29:14 AM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason

Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit. I didn’t say a word about him being a racist. I said the little crackpot draws strong support from anti-Semites and radical leftists. And he does. He also hires them as foreign policy advisers.

And if you think Iran and Hezbollah only affect Israel, or will cease hostilities once Israel is sacrificed, you’re a complete and utter fool.


234 posted on 08/17/2011 10:40:25 AM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason

Are you a Ron Paul supporter?


235 posted on 08/17/2011 11:08:50 AM PDT by americanophile ("this absurd theology of an immoral Bedouin, is a rotting corpse which poisons our lives" - Ataturk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit. I didn’t say a word about him being a racist.

Vocabulary isn't yours:

Definition of ANTI-SEMITISM : hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group

I said the little crackpot

Is it that you dismiss anyone whose views do not agree with your little obsessions, as a crackpot?

And if you think Iran and Hezbollah only affect Israel, or will cease hostilities once Israel is sacrificed, you’re a complete and utter fool.

I didn't say that.

And the world doesn't revolve around the affairs of Iran and Hezbollah and Israel.

Only thing the United States of America should be concerned with in that part of the world is the oil resources of the Mideast, which are of growing importance as developing nations continue to grow and use ever more oil.

So our foreign policy should be concerned with keeping the oil flowing.

What local squabbles might be going on should only be our affair if it impacts the supply of oil.

However, this is becoming so expensive, that we should consider other ways to supply ourselves with energy, while at the same time conserving the energy we use.

236 posted on 08/17/2011 12:54:00 PM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

You aint kiddin.


237 posted on 08/17/2011 12:56:50 PM PDT by crghill (You can't put a condom on your soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason

No big surprise


238 posted on 08/17/2011 12:57:52 PM PDT by crghill (You can't put a condom on your soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason
What's that matter—you have trouble putting America first?

It was cut and run who blamed 9/11 on America. It sounds like it is the surrender monkey who is having a hard time putting America first.
239 posted on 08/17/2011 2:10:25 PM PDT by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason

Thanks for the definition. I’d be lost without you.

Show me the part where I called your little crackpot an anti-Semite. After you do that, we’ll continue.


240 posted on 08/17/2011 9:21:08 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks chatter4.


241 posted on 08/18/2011 5:14:14 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Yes, as a matter of fact, it is that time again -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mowowie
If only if it wasn’t for Romneycare.....

....and being pro-abortion and pro-gun control.

Just little things like that.

242 posted on 08/18/2011 6:48:30 PM PDT by Eaker ("If someone misquotes you, it's because they know you're right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: semantic

I’m torn between RP and MB at this point. bachmann has my heart, Paul my head.


243 posted on 08/18/2011 6:52:31 PM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: The flash mob who wonÂ’t leave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk; Lorianne

>>>That is about the fifth time on this thread that you have made the claim that Ron Paul is a pro-life Republican. He may be personally pro-Life (and maybe a Houston Astros fan and possibly a stamp or coin collector), which is irrelevant. Ron Paul hides behind the 10th Amendment to avoid DOING anything about it.<<<

Lorainne, when you get time, ask so-called “BlackElk” the question, “What can Ron Paul do, as a single House member, to stop abortion?”. I’ll bet you get nothing but a dribble of incoherent nonsense. Ron Paul knows the only way to stop abortion, short of declaring himself dictator, is to appoint pro-life judges (if you don’t give a flip about the constitution), or return the power the states, as the constitution prescribes.

>>>The paleosurrenderman is also a rank fraud on spending by cramming each federal budget with Galveston pork projects, then voting against the Appropriations bill, and depending on the Nancy Pelosis and John Boehners to vote his pork through while he poses for “fiscal conservative” holy pictures.<<<

What this clown won’t tell you is that the concept of “Earmarking” the MSM and BlackElk project is a Hoax. This is the way is truly is:

The House passes a budget of so many dollars. That amount is all that will be spent, period. Then the house targets those dollars: so much for defense, so much for infrastructure, etc.. Whatever is left over is either “earmarked” by individual house and senate member (usually for projects in their districts), or it goes to the executive branch for the President to spend as he pleases.

Understand: Ron Paul earmarks as much as he can of the bloated budget to keep it out of the hands of Obama and his leftist thugs. Earmarks are transparent, but when Obama gets his dirty hands on it, he can spend it as he pleases. Also understand that Ron Paul wants all of the budget “earmarked” for transparency, and all to be constitutionally authorized.

In other words, BlackElk is either being deceitful, or he is ignorant of the budget/earmarking process. Either way, I would not pay him much attention.


244 posted on 08/30/2011 11:28:14 PM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk; Lorianne; lormand; Allegra; SaraJohnson; Tax-chick; fieldmarshaldj

>>>BlackElk wrote: While Ron Paul sees the 10th Amendment as banning federal prohibitions of abortion or sexual perversion posing as marriage while posing for holy pictures as a pro-lifer and pro-family guy (sucker bait for pro-lifers and pro-family folks), SCOTUS and the court system disagree with him or ignore his claim and keep cramming social revolution, abortion, perversion posing as marriage, and a cornucopia of other evils down our throats.<<<

Accordingn to BlackElk, Ron Paul should just march down to the White House, declare himself dictator, and ban abortion.

Otherwise, he is stuck with the hand he has been dealt, and that hand is,

“I, Ron Paul, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

If you cannot trust a man with his oath, you cannot trust him with anything. Thank God Ron Paul believes in the Oath he has taken.

>>>You deal with the system you have.<<<

Unless you are Ron Paul. Then you have to deal with BlackElk’s “system”, which is incomprehensible to all but BlackElk.

>>>On the 10th, Paulie wants us restrained by it and our enemies empowered by it. <<<

Let’s take a look at the 10th Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States [federal government] by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

According to BlackElk, our enemies are the sovereign states and the people of the United States, because only the Federal Government is restrained (or constrained) by it.

BlackElk, does your state, Illinois, know that it is an enemy of the United States?

What a bunch of B.S. this clown spouts.

>>>I want a centralized government on foreign policy, trade, military policy and a bunch of other things. So did the Founders.<<<

That is true, except for the “bunch of other things” part. The Founders made it clear that the authorized powers of the federal government are few and defined. You can read those powers in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. All other powers this massive federal government has accumulated have been usurped from the people, which is TYRANNY.

Of course, BlackElk will never tell you that, because he is a big-government RINO. BlackElk name-drops the Founding Fathers from time to time to maintain credibility. So does the Left. For example, Bill Clinton claimed that the Democrat Party is the Party of Jefferson. He was not lying, well, not totally. It is the party of William Jefferson Clinton.

>>>Ron Paul is an airhead who appeals to the “I gotta be me” crowd and he is a dishonest airhead or the least mentally capable article in shoe leather in the entire American gummint. <<<

Have you noticed that BlackElk is always in the mood for name-calling? In this thread alone, Ron Paul is an “Airhead, a “Paulie”, “Little Twerp”, the “Galveston porkmeister” and “paleoPaulie”. That strategy is straight out of Saul Alinsky’s’ handbook, Rules For Radicals, the “bible” for Barrack Obama, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and other crazies on the far left.


245 posted on 08/31/2011 12:28:52 AM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: chatter4
Hey! 'Ron Paul' and 'Crack Pot' in the same sentence is redundant.

Just trying to help :)

246 posted on 08/31/2011 2:02:01 PM PDT by lormand (A Government who robs Peter to pay Paul, will always have the support of Paul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chatter4

Some other Videos of Ron Paul

RON PAUL SLAPS DOWN 911 TRUTHER QUESTION DURING S.C DEBATE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhQ8xi312l8&feature=related

Ron Paul: Government can quarantine people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuB6SpwYrVg&feature=relmfu

Health care in America: Ron Paul vs. Howard Dean
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvSEjimboKo&NR=1

Ron Paul Hits it out of the Park on CNN American Morning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU9rqYx5lRE&feature=related

Ron Paul 2012 Ron Paul drops TRUTH BOMB on Bill Maher 2 20 09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9ZjgANOhlA&feature=related

Ron Paul on CNN After Being Excluded From FoxNews Debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4unznqeiXU&NR=1

Ron Paul 2012 - Great Interview on D L Hughley 3-7-09 I hope he runs 2012!!! And WINS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkVUiaj4C24&NR=1

Ron Paul vs Bill O’Reilly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UNC1vtP0a0&NR=1

Ron Paul vs Hannity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh2sBKpLxpQ&NR=1

Ron Paul scares Sean Hanity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE6u2rpCSzE&feature=related

Bill Maher: “Ron Paul the only sane man at the CNBC debate”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_7NELg0wR8&feature=related

Ron Paul on Bill Maher
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XYZevkS9Hw&feature=related

Ron Paul vs McCain in SC Debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00qUqEuA86Q&NR=1

John McCain stumped by Ron Paul 1-24-08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKO7BxNNhMk&feature=related

Ron Paul pwns a trick question in Debate 1-10-08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmoIetpgG6g&NR=1

Fox News anchor comes clean on Ron Paul bias.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do3ZtMJEwLw&NR=1

Ron Paul: FED evil; World ‘War Mongering’ Against Iran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l9UpptF5z4&NR=1&feature=fvwp

Ron Paul on the American Civil War
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOE4Ip7In0&NR=1

Ron Paul Says Barack Obama is “Not a Socialist” - Calls Him “Corporatist” Instead
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSaQ7WPd_LM&feature=related

Ron Paul : Lincoln, a Communist (socialist)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HZsPZ_guyE&feature=related

Ron Paul Heroically Stands Up to Chris Matthews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpchEdtS0e4&feature=related

Ron Paul owns Stephen Baldwin in marijuana debate. \
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPuJQaIgJeg&feature=related

Ron Paul: The US Government’s Debt Can Never Be Repaid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWGs26QQBEw&NR=1

Ron Paul: The SEC is a Total Failure and Part of the Problem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV_N6EXTW0w&NR=1

Ron Paul: They’re Warmongering Like It’s 2002!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QNx-QQ9knc&NR=1

Ron Paul: Another Crisis is Coming!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WodL9IJIN7Q&feature=related

Ron Paul 2012: Unmatched Intellect
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWpICzxteMk&feature=related

Ron Paul- Socialism in a Libertarian society vs Libertarianism in a Socialist society
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21fi6mYjhKI&feature=related

Ron Paul was right! 1998-2002 predictions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNDvLRUevSo&feature=related

The Amazingly Accurate Predictions of Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48Gfzgxh3ZQ&feature=related

Ron Paul debate question BANNED from Fox News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54WFoV-veCM&NR=1

Ron Paul 2012: A Libertarian Renaissance?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHIt7dAFjk4&NR=1

Ron Paul: Suspend The Income Tax For 3-4 Years! (CNBC 1/2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPkQSk8Pn0I&NR=1

Ron Paul: America Is With Me On Foreign Policy (CNBC 2/2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9Wcp58IJQU&NR=1

Ron Paul: Open the Federal Reserve’s Secret Archives!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncw39IADHa4&NR=1

Ron Paul Owns Donald Trump
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alfi7cm0qjw&feature=related

Ron Paul Questions Hillary on $1 Billion London Fortress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66QjFidpnsg&NR=1

Ron Paul on Electibility:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JId_kGKowfI&feature=related

Ron Paul on CNN after being excluded from Fox News debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4unznqei7XU&feature=related

Ron Paul Owns Michael Moore On Larry King Live
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiWyUxcVM04&feature=related

RON PAUL NAILS (UNAIRED) LARRY KING
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxB6fwgRVkQ&feature=related

Ron Paul Rocks The View
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLEQ3p1t-d4&feature=related

Ron Paul Correctly Predicts Obama Lie!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQ2GWW5bitM&feature=related

1/6 Ron Paul 20/20 Banned ABC News Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6a9549ZeqQ&feature=related

2/6 Ron Paul 20/20 Banned ABC News Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1NDs4RMbHU&NR=1

3/6 Ron Paul 20/20 Banned ABC News Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tYcH1BeSc4&feature=related

4/6 Ron Paul 20/20 Banned ABC News Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRIK2lt7H4M&feature=related

5/6 Ron Paul 20/20 Banned ABC News Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5iXmAie4Xc&feature=related

6/6 Ron Paul 20/20 Banned ABC News Interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hoiancRfxc&feature=related

Ron Paul on Lou Dobbs About NAU Super Highway
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogRQYNZksoY

RON PAUL EXPOSED (IN HIS OWN WORDS)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mz9pDGHBTo&feature=related


247 posted on 09/02/2011 5:38:37 AM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

>>Evidence suggests he is an anti-semite.<<<

What evidence?


248 posted on 09/02/2011 5:39:18 AM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: crghill

>>>So, where are the true conservatives?<<<

There are very few in the GOP. I believe our culture has been corrupted by foreign influence to the point that it would unrecognizable to traditional conservatives, and that modern day “conservatives” have adapted to that culture.
Gone are the days of Washington, when he wrote that we have the same religion, manners and customs (with slight shades of difference), and when he wrote that we should not be overly friendly to some nations and overly unfriendly to others.


249 posted on 09/02/2011 5:54:36 AM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: semantic

>>>If this country ever really embraced reform, it would destroy my existing portfolio. But, I sleep well at night knowing that your opinion is shared by those who control the political process.

Once again, I must thank you for clarifying the issues. Nothing is worse than uncertainty - it makes for poor investment planning, and ultimately, a chitty, impoverished life.<<<

LOL. My wife and I have been investing using your strategy for years. Why bet on the dollar if all we are going to get is more of the same, no matter which party wins. Establishment candidates will destroy our financial system.

Rick Perry recently “adopted” Ron Paul’s anti-Fed Reserve postion, but Perry’s positions are like the wind.


250 posted on 09/02/2011 6:03:35 AM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-274 next 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