Posted on 07/18/2007 9:32:48 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
But don't let my interruption of your pointless cheerleading for the status quo cause you to start thinking for once...
Ron Paul looks a lot like either Doctor Who #2, Doctor Who #3, or a combination of both. He would be a completely different kind of illegal alien if he was Doctor Who.
Ok. Which is your favorite “controlled substances”?
Why are you so sure I would miss the nuance of that? You think I’m hooked on a “controlled substance”? (How is that for nuance?)
Of course he will win. He is a rock star, nothing can touch him unless an actor gets in the race.
“He’s anti-war”
Actually he is pro-war. He is for constitutionally declared wars not these half ass Wars In Name Only. (Hey look another WINO about to be not declared!)
YAWN______________________________________________!
Yawn.
Ron Paul suggested issuing letters of marque and reprisal, apparently oblivious that such letters aren't worth the paper they are printed on any more and that such letters wouldn't really apply in bin Laden's case.
Letters of marque and reprisal were originally issued by countries to encourage private citizens to harass the shipping of a rival power. The letters could be presented to any third party that tried to intervene against the privateers, because it demonstrated that they were not pirates but were under the legal protection of the power that issued the letters.
Of course, the letters were meaningless to the courts of the rival power, so privateers had to be very careful not to be captured.
The incentive these private citizens had was simple: they got to keep the cargo of any ships they were able to capture.
No country in the world recognizes letters of marque and reprisal any more - the United States certainly does not recognize them.
Even if they did and privateers could depend on them for protection, they are not likely to find too many terrorists on the high seas. They would have more success locating terrorists by hijacking airplanes, which in today's environment is impractical. Also, terrorists generally do not have cargoholds full of goods to incentivize privateers.
All this is moot, since we already have a program to encourage private citizens to hunt down bin Laden: a $50M bounty on his head.
So Ron Paul's "plan" is a non-plan which is already redundant.
Ron Paul is an isolationist. By its very nature isolationism is a passive strategy, and the antithesis to strong national security.
Isolationism and passivism brought us 9/11.
>>As Paul puts it: “Freedom is popular.”
“I agree with his message of freedom and limited government,” said Jennifer Terhune, a 22-year-old dental-hygiene student in Reno. “People are dependent on the government for everything, and they need to start standing up for themselves. The country is getting so far away from that.”<<
Hear, Hear
Come on...you can do better than yawning at me!
One of the things I hear from a lot of supporters of Ron Paul is that he is very cerebral (the same way the media always refers to the darlings of the left such as Bill Bradley and Adalai Stevenson) but that he just doesn’t come across well to the er...”Sheeple” (as you refer to those who disagree with your candidate)
Perhaps (like some of his sleepy supporters) he just needs a cup of expresso to perk him up and light a fire under him in the eyes of the general public...:)
Your post are boring.What can I say.
No he's not. Perhaps you may want to look at the definition of isolationism. Rep. Paul believes in trade with all and conversations with all. He's been quite clear on that. Because historically that's how you can change a nation's bent (i.e. Vietnam)
Actually, I saw it as a pretty shallow response when all you can do is type “Yawn”, characterize someone as “sheeple” and call them boring.
You shouldn't make stupid assumptions about my foreign policy views, just because I reject an America blaming fool like Ron Paul.
I see nothing inconsistent with my characterization of him as an isolationist in the military sense, which is exactly what I meant.
Iraq and the Middle East is not Vietnam. It has not been from day one, as much as some people in this country would like it to be.
I don't take myself as seriously as you may think.
I do know what Ron Paul says, and I know it is a view that supports the enemy, much like any of the RATs on the otherside.
I don't need to apologize for being passionate regarding my support for our troops and the war on terror.
Regarding being a proxy for the jihad, if the shoe fits, wear it.
Course it isn't. It's much worse as it's surrounded by other nations that feel exactly the same way. Trying to keep together a nation molded from a war ending treaty 80 years later is not good foreign policy.
Perhaps you can tell that to Jim Rob too when the Rudy spammers were bit-canned?
Using your logic, any DU or moveon troll can post here too?
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.