Ron Paul Is A Crackpot

Youtube ^ | August 11, 2011 | Chatter4

[chatter4]

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

[Larry Lucido]

Truth liberates. Stupid hurts.

[lormand]

Freerepublic is a Conservative forum. The idol known as RON PAUL to his drones is a libertarian. See any disconnect there?

[Brilliant]

The big problem with Ron Paul’s proposed policy is that if every tin-pan dictator had a nuke, this world would be a much more dangerous place than it is. If Iran gets the bomb, then the Saudis will need one, the Syrians will need one, the Egyptians will need one, Turkey will need one, Libya will need one, and every other dictatorship in the region will need one. Eventually, one of them will use it. If they all have nukes, then we will be looking fondly on the time when the ME was only a powder keg, because we will be looking at Armageddon. And the fact that we made it thru the Cold War without a nuclear disaster is not very convincing. We came very close on several occasions, and it was not an isolationist policy that got us thru the danger.

[Proud2BeRight]

There is probably a strong correlation between Ron Paul supporters and Alex Jones followers.

[crghill]

See any disconnect in the majority of the Republican party and traditional conservative values? Your GOP goddess Ann Coulter now sits on the GOProud board.

So, where are the true conservatives?

[corlorde]

IF FR had a “like” button, I’d use it for your post.

That would be cool.

[Salamander]

Every car I’ve seen sporting a “Paul” sticker also had “9/11 Was An Inside Job” and assorted crazy “Aliens Are Real!” stuff.

I don’t want the King of the Crackpots in the WH.

[Salamander]

Ha!

See my post #27!

:))

[lormand]

Ron Paul frequents the Alex Jones show. The guy who works next to me absolutely loves both Alex Jones and Ron Paul. I found out thru him that many Ron Paul drones don’t vote in the general election because like all past Ron Paul for President endeavors, Ron Paul looses and doesn’t win a single state’s primary.

So, let’s just withstand his drones for one more election cycle but keep educating them in the meantime.

[semantic]

Sometimes, when I believe this country might have a chance, no matter how slim, I read a post like yours and get slapped back to reality.

Personally, I've washed my hands of the whole affair, but I still focus on placing the right bets in order to at least enjoy a prosperous future.

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.

Therefore, and I tell this to everyone, bet on the status quo. That means ever larger gov't, ever larger deficits, ever larger debt. That means currency devaluation, inflation (commodities, not leveraged instruments ie mortgages) and social unrest. That in turn means greater police power, which means more profits for suppliers - both military & domestic.

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.

[all the best]

“Evidence suggests he is an anti-semite.”

Curious as to what that evidence is. Because he would cut off foreign aid to all countries including Israel?

[nuconvert]

“Ron Paul Is A Crackpot”

And the Pope’s catholic

[TigersEye]

Two reasons we didn't attack the USSR. 1)They had nukes before we had any chance to do anything about it. 2)The USSR built nukes to maintain a standoff with us. Iran is building nukes to use them.

Apparently RP is too stupid to see that.

[Longbow1969]

There are two unwritten rules here.

1. You can’t like RP.

Ron Paul is libertarian, not a conservative. This is a conservative forum.

I know Paulbots get angry when they can't spam forums with nonsensical, conspiratorial nonsense, but this just isn't the place for a bunch of libertarian drivel. It's bad enough I have to deal with paulspam on even the weather and gaming forums I frequent, so thank God paulbots get some push back here and can't spam at will without being called on it.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Paul is one of those who live in the shadow of Obama, 10% facts 90% nonsense. His supporters grasp onto the 10% and ignore the 90% hyperbole and rhetoric.

Obama and Paul are on opposite ends of the teeter-totter trying to rock everyone else in between.

He’s an empty suit.

[Mr. Mojo]

Ron Paul isn’t at all concerned about Islamic nations joining the nuclear club because he believes “mutually assured destruction” (MAD) will prevent a nuke disaster in the U.S., just like it did during the Cold War. This of course ignores a couple of facts -— 1) cult-crazed Islamics (like the Iranian mullahs and their puppet Ahmadinejad) don’t have the same self-preservation instincts as our old Soviet foes; and 2) the great potential for nuclear arms to end up in the possession of terrorist orgs. The Cold War doctrine of “MAD” doesn’t apply in these circumstances, obviously. In the era of Islamic fanaticism combined with advanced nuclear tech, the type of isolationism RP advocates is suicidal.

[cowtowney]

What about “Global Warming” Newt Gingrich ?

Is he a conservative? Lots of people on here like Newt

Talk about crackpots. Newt’s a big one.

What about mcCain? Lots of people on here liked him 3 years ago. Is he conservative?

Why about pro-abortion Romney ? Is he conservative? He leads some polls.

[crghill]

Rational debate requires the debaters to rise above disparaging comments and childish name calling. I sense that such debate may be above you.

[Longbow1969]

Once again, I must thank you for clarifying the issues.

Err, your welcome...

Was there something in my post you were actually disputing, or was this just a not so cleverly disguised (yet extremely whiny) post in defense of Ron Paul?

[FredZarguna]

Consider a few things -- and before you start flaming me -- understand that I do not support Paul, and I would not vote for him unless he were the nominee and therefore the only choice:

• Paul's politics are essentially the politics of the Founders. His Constitutional opinions are generally quite valid. The foreign policy and military outlook of the Founders was predicated on the fact that we were surrounded by two oceans to the east and west, and by wilderness to the north and south (and yes, to the west as well for a long time.)

  That geography no longer represents a serious obstacle to our enemies, and to the extent that Paul's isolationism continues to reflect the geopolitical realities of 1787, he is, indeed, a crackpot. But that does not change his Constitutional soundness.

• In the 1920's, Americans universally believed that Congress had no authority to ban the manufacture, sale, importation, or consumption of alcohol. By 1936, possession, sale, and importation of particular kinds of vegetables was banned completely by a simple act of Congress. By the 1990's a single Federal Bureaucrat named David Kessler asserted an absolute right to regulate tobacco in any manner he desired by simply issuing a policy statement. At the beginning of the 21st Century, we are now witnessing the spectacle of municipal policy makers banning the use of a legal product in our own homes.

  If you can't see that alcohol and drug prohibition have done tremendous violence to our liberty -- while accomplishing virtually nothing to reduce consumption -- I have nothing more to say to you. I'm not a (L/l)ibertarian but I believe the "Drug War" is stupid, expensive, has bloated the government, robbed us of our freedom, and is ultimately counterproductive.

  It needs to go away.

• Newt Gingrich, no (l/L)ibertarian by any means, is largely on-board with Ron Paul in re: the Fed, and he is correct. The idea that a government of, by, and for the People allows a completely unelected and unaccountable oligarchy of bankers to set monetary (and consequently, to a large degree fiscal) policy without oversight or even transparency is a disgrace to the Republic and a violation of the Constitution. The Fed has now p!ssed away trillions of dollars completely in secret on behalf of the United States. The money will need to be repaid by people as yet unborn, or will show up in the form of inflation on current taxpayers, and in either case represents an absolute despotism because neither we, the living, nor the unborn have been permitted the chance to so much as squeak our displeasure.

  The Fed must be brought to heel, or it must be destroyed. Paul is simply NOT wrong about that. And it is good to hear there are actual conservatives now voicing many of the same opinions.

• 9/11 and Israel: he's an ass, who's [nearly] disqualified himself with his slimy insinuations.
• Gay "marriage:" his thoughts largely reflect the thinking of the next generation of Americans. Very sadly and with tragic and devastating consequences for the country, I agree. Nevertheless, the solution to this problem is probably going to be determined by medical technology, because we will lose the political battle completely in the next 20-30 years.
• Abortion: Strongly pro-life. Do FReepers disagree with that?

  Libertarianism is an important component of the Republican party and is the source of a great many ideas (some good, some not) and energy (some good, some not.) Not all of Paul's supporters are going to vote for 0bama or for the Libertarian Party. Nevertheless, I would much rather have liberatarian influences in my Party than the influences of, say, the Maine Ladies or John McCain.