Posted on 11/03/2007 9:47:59 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
Ron Paul's campaign literature says "end the war." "Immediate withdrawal of troops."
You can couch it in all the pretty terms you want, but it's still "surrender."
I've heard all the Ron Paul nonsense on here for months. You're just saying the same thing the rest of the acolytes say.
Election fraud
Well, Ron Paul is the “fraud” Republican candidate.
“But the problem is, Republicans have been slowly compromising and assuming these liberal traits, so traits which were once liberal, are now starting to present themselves as conservative traits.”
Well, they all grow government, so that is a big strike against conservatism right there. The problem with that is, that cat was let out of the bag after the civil war and he ain’t going back in. That is something conservatives will have to work on a LONG time. There is no way 1 or even 5 “ideologically pure” conservatives can undo that damage.
The damage has been so profound, that I don’t believe any “pure conservative” can get elected at the national level in this country. This is one of the most conservative forum on the net and we are ate up with our own “liberals” who pray to the PC gods, tell us how to live, raise our kids and what we should and should not say in private, with dire consequences.
I’m just curious. Ron Paul has been in the House for many years, yet he has never held a Committee Chairmanship. Aren’t COmmittee Chairmanships awarded on the basis of seignority? It seems to me that if he were the Chairman of whatever Committee spends the most money, it would be a Godsend and the answer to a lot of GOP problems. He’d be willing to slash the budget by 90% and wouldn’t worry about what people thought of it. He could effectively block all but essential government spending. He would take the heat and love it.
It'll never happen. To gain Paul's endorsement of the nominee should he lose in the primaries, the GOP will ask Chris Peden to step down, and Paul will run unopposed. There'll be a deal brokered, unless the GOP wants Paul's supporters to stay home or vote 3rd party in the general.
The GOP hates Paul's guts, and Paul has been in and out of Congress over the last 30 years. His 10 terms weren't all in a row.
Plus, in today's geopolitical climate, I believe Paul's non-interventionalist policies would render us quite vulnerble.
“I hate his blame America first attitude, not him.”
Seconded.
In my opinion, his ineptitude is displayed by the fact that those whom he has allied himself with are simply out of control. He has no clue how to deal with it and that more than demonstrates he is not qualified to be President.
I don’t blame him for what those kooks do. If he tried to distance himself from every little incident, that is all he would have time to do.
However, When you lie down with dogs....well, you know the rest. Let the chips fall where they may.
I guess we agree with each other more than I thought. Darn, I like to find someone I can argue with, and on FR Paul threads are about the only place I can find many disagreements.
You couldn't be any more wrong. The vast majority of Paul's supporters are independents, libertarians, and angry conservatives who WILL make an impact in this election. Keep deluding yourself that the base of Paul's support is white supremacists, anti-war nutcases, and conspiracy theorists.
Believe what you want, but the only people who would vote for an anti-American terrorist appeaser are anti-Americans, and they are going to vote for the most anti-American candidate. If cut and run does not run, they will vote democrat.
Thanks for the ping.
Like..duh?
Why would anti-war kooks and leftists support Paul anyway? One of the biggest tenets of the anti-war left is global socialism. They oppose the war in Iraq but have no problem with our troops being used for humanitarian missions and crap. Paul opposes all of this garbage, that and the envirowackoism. Now YOU can believe what you want, but them's the facts.
No.
Has he ever run for a chairmanship?
"..the answer to a lot of GOP problems."
Like what kind of problems?
I know a dozen or so RP supporters personally. Almost all are white collar professionals who formerly voted Republican. I’ve also seen a number of former freepers on other sites who support RP. They seem to be motivated in about equal measure by RP’s position on the war and limited govt. It’s true you also see a lot of libertarian leaning liberals supporting him as well (see digg.com for example), but it’s a mistake to think they are his only supporters.
Because FR officially supports the war, and most posters here are fervently in favor of continuing the war, it’s easy to believe that there is universal support among R’s for the war. From what I see, that is not the case, and just about everyone I know would be considered conservative. There is substantial dissent, and even more who are on the fence. Simply dismissing anyone who opposes the war as anti-American is not a winning strategy.
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.