It's Conservatism (Or why we can't support Ron Paul)

Your post reflects the same attitude we saw in 2008. The GOP establishment is against Ron Paul because he is too conservative, and he would begin to dismantle the grand and glorious Federal government that was built by the sweat of the Republican brow.

If Ron Paul would have received the republican nomination in 2008, we would now be enjoying a much improved America, one without so much government and debt.

Instead, the republicans nominated a guaranteed loser rather than attempt real change.

How’d that work out for you?

He’s not too conservative. I already said that in the article. He’s too damn libertarian. Dismantling the federal government isn’t the problem, it’s becoming isolationist, cutting our military presence, allowing drugs and prostitution and a host of other things.

If Ron Paul had won the GOP nomination, there’s no way in hell that we could have won the 2008 election. Some old little fruitcake against the Hope and Change of Obama? Oh wait, that’s McCain too. So no, he wouldn’t of won. No one could have won that was in the GOP field.

The Republicans nominated a loser, but that’s not who the conservatives nominated.

Ron Paul called Reagan a failure and said he wanted to “distance himself from the administration.” Therefore, any connections Paul tries to play up with Reagan are a complete farce.

You all should remember, Al Gore was back then (when Perry was involved), considered a moderate. He had positions many of us would agree with, he opposed federal funding of abortion, voted in favor of a bill which supported a moment in silence in schools, and voted against a ban on interstate sales of guns. That’s why he was able to win elections in Tennessee. He was also one of the few Democrats, I think one of only ten, that supported the Gulf War.

The point of me bringing this up by the way, isn’t to defend Gore, but to point out, back then he was a moderate Democrat and Perry was too. So, Perry became disenchanted and switched parties. You wanna talk Reagan? Well, that’s a switch reminiscent of Reagan’s switch.

Oh and one more thing. Palin supported his reelection bid.

Read this excellent post on him:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2757087/posts?page=23#23

That is usually based upon a misunderstanding of the role of personal responsibility and duty in society. Some would prefer that be dictated and regimented by a central government. Others, including our founders, thought there was a better system. But don't worry, the scions of Europe thought that would lead to anarchy too.

I’m curious how the RPites feel about their hero now that he’s stated he believes Iran should be allowed to have nukes? From what I understand, the main reason RP didn’t “win” the straw poll was because of his statement during the debate regarding Iran and nukes. RP is a dangerous moron, period.

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.