Ron Paul on C-SPAN Washington Journal NOW

C-SPAN Washington Journal ^ | 12 Oct 2007 | Self

[angkor]

Heads up you Ron Paul people, your man is on C-SPAN right now.

[hedgetrimmer]

After all, if a warmonger like Bush would do it,

Who said that we had begun a hundred years war? How does a nation survive that, especially when our military is smaller than it was during the Viet Nam war, and the number of ships in our Navy is smaller than its been in a century? How does this president think we will win a hundred years war? By contracting out many of the duties to other nations and foreign corporations so they can get rich off it? This is just another special way that the Bush presidency is redistributing our wealth to the foreign interests and internationalists. Now he says it will continue for 100 years. There won't be a US economy left when he's finished.

I don't see how any loyal American can support these policies.

[ejonesie22]

Exactly, the role of out military is to protect our nation, its people and their way of life.

Oil and other trade items are an integral part of that life in 21st century America. Therefore a “war for oil” is actually a good use for our armed forces. Out military protecting our trading partners and the resources we purchase is by its very nature protecting the country.

[bcsco]

America is NOT a ‘homeland’.

Go back and read what I wrote. Then come back and answer the question I posed.

[bcsco]

Go back and read what I wrote. Then come back and answer the question I posed.

[bcsco]

Exactly, the role of out military is to protect our nation, its people and their way of life.

But they'll become unnecessary once RonPaul sits down with the world's leaders and convinces them of the error of their ways. After all we have to "Give peace a chance".

[hedgetrimmer]

Mr. Bush is the man who institutionalized, through the executive branch, the phony concept of American ‘homeland’ in our government, not Mr. Paul.

I would hope that you would correct this glaring misstatement.

[hedgetrimmer]

You support a hundred years war too?

[ejonesie22]

That and a fleet of yellow submarines...

[bcsco]

I never once stated that Ron Paul used the term ‘homeland’. I used that term in defining the borders of the U.S.

Now, go bat to the post you replied to, read it, and respond to my question.

[bcsco]

Go back and read what I wrote. Then come back and answer the question I posed.

[bcsco]

This entire thread is becoming very redundant. Sheesh! Some people will do/say anything to not respond to a legitimate question.

[bcsco]

Are we having fun yet?

[ejonesie22]

I have seen that argument about America not being the “Homeland” in KOS and DU post before.

I guess we are not the “land” of the free and “home” of the brave after all...

Sheesh, if we are not a Homeland what is. We referred to it that way in WWII more than a few times...

Paul folks need to make up the minds. They want to withdrawn and defend the country within its borders but don’t call it a Homeland?

[ejonesie22]

Always...

[bcsco]

He, he, he. Some people get really uptight about the simplest things, don’t they. Naturally, the notion is to disparage the idea of ‘homeland security’ and the idea we have to defend ourselves because of a situation WE created.

Fruit Loops for sure.

[ejonesie22]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/18/94711/0748

Just a little extra for the hell of it.

Seems not liking the term “Homeland” is popular...

[bcsco]

From your link:

Absolutely. (8+ / 0-) I've been saying this for years. America is an idea. That is what provides our sense of nationhood - fealty to democratic, egalitarian, peaceful ideas. We're not a nation because we were born in this land, or because we share the same ancestry - none of that BS.

And it's worth noting that, as far as I can tell, the person who introduced the concept of "homeland" was none other than the odious Joe Lieberman.

I'm not part of a redneck agenda - Green Day

by eugene on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 08:22:53 AM PDT

It's the Joooooooooooos! Sound familiar?

Worth noting; 'homeland' is objectionable because it Connotates sovereignty. Sovereignty is bad because it implies a nation that has control over its borders and who can participate in its governance.

[hedgetrimmer]

I used that term in defining the borders of the U.S.

And I responded that the US is not a 'homeland'. You internationalists do not remark on the US as a nation. I was merely pointing that out.

[bcsco]

And I responded that the US is not a 'homeland'. You internationalists do not remark on the US as a nation. I was merely pointing that out.

You and DU and KOs agree.

1. I'm not a internationalist.

2. When the hell are you going to get up the courage to answer my questions?

[bcsco]

Oh, fun fun fun fun fun fun fun...