Somebody, please, hit the closing theme:
Posted on 09/11/2007 10:52:54 AM PDT by Austin Willard Wright
ABC News' Nitya Venkataraman and Nancy Flores report: While his 2008 rivals in Washington, D.C. spent the morning in congressional panels debating the future of US involvement in Iraq, GOP Presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul charged the U.S. has "dug a hole for [itself]" in Iraq, and simultaneously defended his anti-war place in the Republican party and jabbed the current administration saying, "you don't have to be a war monger to be a conservative."
At a policy forum at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C., Paul described Iraq as a "preemptive war" saying it was a "planned invasion and occupation" of a "country that was no threat to us whatsoever."
What might seem like bold rhetoric from the fiery Texas Republican on the anniversary of a historic day is actually nothing new for Paul. His assertions at the forum were consistent with his presidential platform and congressional career, both of which draw heavily from libertarian and constitutionalist ideals.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
Who?
Dear Ron Paul, why don’t you jump into a hole.
Love,
FlipWilson
Note to Ron Paul junkies: Get lost!
what a freakin’ buffoon
Wow, it really is “bold” to spew treason on a college campus. How “fiery” and stuff.
Nah....the “buffons” are the Pollyanna’s who predicted that the war would pay for itself via oil, that Iraq would become a democratic shining light for the Middle East, etc. Ron Paul was right all along.
Not quite as bad as one RPer described it at the Texas Straw Poll:” the noose that Bush tied around the neck of the US, . . . the country will hang on it.”
Neither wants to rescue the Nation or protect the right of the citizens to live without more 9-11’s: it’s all about power.
Ron Paul is a perfect example of “Whatever is wrong in the world is the fault of the United States of America” blamer.
He was at Johns Hopkins, how did he evade the nice men in the white coats?
Ron Paul is as much a TRAITOR as the democrats. He can’t see past his nose. Nor can he see what the future would bring to this country if we did what he wants.
Speaking of holes...
How ‘bout that Ron Paul?
Paulestinians love putting words in other people's mouths, while simultaneously striving to explain away the garbage that oozes from the mouth of their cult leader.
Ron Paul would be better advised to concentrate on his stengths — tax elimination, the 2A, ...drastically reducing the size and scope of gov’t. But he appears intent on emphasizing his glaring weakness.
Well you definitely have to respect an independent mind like Paul. Unfortunately, the time to oppose the war was when we went into it. To his credit, Paul voted against it. Now that we are there, though, I think the cut and run makes little sense.
Somebody, please, hit the closing theme:
But, alas, his acolytes have no respect for those of us who do not share RP's offbeat opinions.
Ron Paul advising us "you don't have to be a war monger to be a conservative."
Rudy is only 10% right on domestic issues and 80% right on national security issues, he is labeled as the UberRINO.
Fred Thompson is 80% right on domestic issues and 90% right on national security, but he isn’t good enough..
Duncan Hunter is 90% right on domestic and 90% right on national security, he also isn’t good enough..
Yea, I just pulled all those numbers out of my ass.. but you get my point.
>> Ron Paul was right all along.
“All along” ain’t over yet, bucko, any more than it was over when another ignorant traitor puke by the name of Neville Chamberlain, explained to the world that by rolling over for Hitler he had achieved “peace in our time”.
Ron Paul is an ostrich.
Notice how they are defending Iran’s nut now, he is their next hope to get rid of Israel for good.
Paul was against the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 which called for no military intervention. I wonder if he was in on the Oil for Food scam?
GO AWAY YOU WALLY COX LOOKING BOZO. Change parties please. You sound as good as Hussein Obama and the Silk Pony.
The question I have is whether a Paul 3d party candidacy would take more away from the GOP nominee or from Hillary.
What baffles me is how he got any Republican votes in the first place.
Regardless, you’re probably right. He’s finished, over and done. Republicans will put their votes where they will do the most good. The Libtards anti war Rino’s will vote for McCain, who Ron Paul has made look more sane.
Amazingly disgusting isn’t it? Ron Paul and the Paulnuts do not realize the damage they are doing by pissing off the republican base he will need to retain his GOP house seat. Chuck Hagel had to learn the hard way by realizing he painted himself in a corner. Ron Paul is way ahead of Hagel in boxing himself in.
Be about equal, IMO.
Watch it, you're scaring this guy.
‘Nah....the “buffons” are the Pollyanna’s who predicted that the war would pay for itself via oil, that Iraq would become a democratic shining light for the Middle East, etc. Ron Paul was right all along.’
Based on the above nonsense, its clear Ron Paul is running for the wrong party nomination.
Well said. Paul is only running to divide Republicans. He’s a plant. Snicker.
Holding my nose..he should change his name to Ron Pauline - sissy congressman
He is an idiot when it comes to the war on terror..period.
After all this appeared to be the popular view, at least according to the MSM.
However, he will realize that the anti-war agenda is not as popular as many think. False polls, a left biased media that editorializes everything has created a “perception” of an unpopular war is no true indicator of the mood in American society on this war. Everyone would agree that we want our boys home as soon as possible, even the most hawkish. No one wants any more dying in Iraq. However, the notion that most Americans support failure and want to quit in face of a vast Islamic threat, of which Iraq, Iran, Syria are all part of is false.
Ron Paul thought that his position on Iraq gave him an advantage, being against a war that is ugly and unpopular. However, it will be his undoing in all reality since his party won’t back him for that single reason.
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,720,000 for george bush nut. (0.26 seconds)
The Google game is fun!
Ron Paul was flying below the radar with his nutiness before. By running for the presidency, he has exposed himself and his views are the talk of republican circles. Republicans do not like what they see in this man. He is unfit to be in Congress representing the GOP. He is toast.
L. Ron oughta know about holes and digging into them.
Hey, this is a Paul thread not a Giuliani thread.
Typical like most liberals hate/blame Bush...
The problem is that not enough people use context as in, WHERE WOULD WE BE IF BUSH HAD NOT ACTED... How many more American citizens would be dead....
If Bush had not acted against Saddam Hussein in March 2003 and if Saddam had then (emboldened by UBL Success on 911) and gaining strength (read money) using the Oil For Food corruption scam.. either directly or indirectly funneled... (Money, Weapons, Assistance) to Al-Qaeda and then they performed another more grandiose attack on the U.S. what would the critics say then?
Wouldn’t the anti-war left decry Bush in that he didn’t do enough to stop terror.... Wouldn’t the Right ridicule Bush for failing to take action like Clinton before him?
And then after proof of Saddams involvement would it have changed the outcome of the insurgency? Wouldn’t the facts on the ground still be the same? The question that America is wrestling with is.... Is it worth it? and to that answer Bush and his administration has done a poor job in reminding America that it is worth it....
If of course you do not use context then yes everything that any President has ever done has consequently been the wrong decision at the wrong place at the wrong time....
In Paul's defense, Oscar Wyatt (US Oilman on trial for being part of the scam) didn't give anything to Paul, he mostly gave to Dems.
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?key=DJR3D&txtName=wyatt,%20o&txtState=TX&txtAll=Y&Order=N
Here are Paul's donors:
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?key=DJR3D&txtState=TX&txtCand=Paul&txt2008=Y&Order=N
With all my differences with the guy, I really doubt he had anything to do with oil for food.
Ron Paul =
“He is unfit to be in Congress representing the GOP.”
I live in his district. We are going to do our best during the primary to return him to his medical practice.
Ron Paul makes a lot of sense. I wonder if we are seeing the repeat of the 1850’s and the end of the Whigs, what with this split of Big Gov repubs with ideological conservatives.
Would you want this guy doing "doctor things" to you?
I think I now know why he had to give up the 'doctor gig'.
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.