Posted on 12/16/2007 10:43:13 PM PST by grundle
How sad, you should teach your 25 year old son reading comprehension...
“We need oil idiot.”
Oh yeah, and we need big government to supply it, because all conservatives know the free market doesn’t work dont they???
What a crock. Some of you conservatives are nothing but DUmmies with a pro war stiffy. It’s really sad.
What are you going to do. Snap your fingers and a genie from Saudi Arabia will supply it? You Paulistas are fools. Oil come from hard work these days. It’s not a simple matter of just paying some Arab. World politics and armies factor in/
You are so spoiled living in the USA. You can buy things anytime you want here. The geo-politics of oil is much different. It involves armies, militaries, nukes, raw power and raw politics
You are a master at stinging together irrelevancies and thinking you have made a brilliant point. And I love that Switzerland riff you have. I read Harry Brown books years ago where he extolled the Swiss and their semi gold backed currency
73 years old is all Harry Browne got to for all his alleged brilliance. Such an über libertarian could surely figure out how to do better than that
I have encountered three types of Paulites:
1) Libertarians (small or large L) who are primarily looking at Paul because they are for minimal government. They’re for Paul because the GOP had 1994-2006 in charge of Congress and failed to deliver the GOP promise of less government. I don’t think these will vote for Hillary. Usually they either vote Libertarian, Constitution Party, or GOP.
2) Anti-war Dims who are having an amusing time screwing about with the GOP primary process. They’re going to Paul also because they’re mad at Nancy Pelosi for not doing their bidding. These will vote for Hillary or any other Dim.
3) Angry “paleo-cons” who are just mad at ‘neo-con’ policies, want our troops on the border and not Iraq, hold ill feelings towards Israel, or are upset about ‘fiat currencies.’ (emphasis on ‘or’ there, usually it’s one of the above and not all). I have no idea what these guys will do. The people I know who fit this bill stayed home in ‘06.
IMO that’s two of three categories that fits some sort of conservative definition or at least are *not* natural Dim voters.
The sad thing is I can see Paul hanging on long enough that the nomination of a total RINO is inevitable, whereupon the groups 1) and 3) will decide that their fringe position is justified (rather than caused _by_) the fractured conservative vote.
If we could get all the conservatives pulling in one direction (preferably FRed IMO) we could get a candidate we could be proud of.
Essentially, if Giuliani and McCain had hired a gang of ill-mannered Internet bashers to go around slamming Ron Paul on public forums, I would expect their posts to sound just like the shallow, thuggish, anti-Paul comments on FR.
I don't know who these people are, but they aren't interested in "conserving" the Constitution. They sound like a bunch of defense industry lobbyists, concerned that if we stop fighting Islamic radicals for five minutes, a whole quarter's profits will be lost.
Ever heard of the free market? Look into it.
Perot got 20 million votes - and won no state.
Because Paul won't get enough votes. Not enough to win the primary, not enough to win in the electoral college.
There is nothing wrong with my son’s reading comprehension. He graduated at the top of his class. It is people who do know an anti-American coward when he makes public announcements stating so that is sad.
I am amazed at Ron Paul’s successful fund raising. His message is clearly consistent with his actions.
He has overwhelming grass root support for limited government, defending the Constitution, pro-life and protecting individual liberties. His position is even stronger than Perot’s because he is in a major party and there are apparently a flood of volunteers working to get him the nomination. Hopefully this will be a rebirth of Conservatism.
In addition to power in general, yes. The alternative scenario is he would have used conventional weapons to kill millions and take S. Korea already and be on his way to Japan.
Peace through strength, weakness is provocative. These are basic brutal facts throughout history.
It's a false view to think we are the cause of tyrants escalation in arms. Of course we could easily avoid it: let Kim, and have let the Soviets, win militarily with lesser arms. But freedom and lives would have been lost.
This simplistic and I believe naive aspect of the Paul view is dangerous in this world we live in.
The wall came down in Berlin, maybe the same happens with Korea.
I think it's inevitable but then I have a hopeless confidence in the human spirit's will to be free.
I appreciate the strength of the S. Korean military. However, Kim has an amazing amount of first strike destruction aimed at Seoul. I believe the U.S. soldiers there have prevented him from firing them. Even if the South eventually won; the carnage would be inconceivable.
So, I disagree with the younger Koreans. Really appreciate your experience there...
Good post, spot on analysis of the Paul Phenom, IMO..
And quite a few others around the country if you haven't noticed.
You know, you need to get out more.
You still think N. Korea is all-powerful and S. Korea is weak. You need to take another look. Additionally, China would not support N.Korea if it tried to overrun S.Korea.
If we left S. Korea, the S. Koreans would decide whether they needed more military or their current troop/weapons level was adequate to contain N. Korea. They are a prosperous economy and could afford to protect their own country.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/goldwater_is_to_reagan_as_ron.html
well, i felt a bit bad putting your son out there like that, but i was following your lead. If your thought process is so binary as to separate the crowd into bomb first ask questions later, and “anti-american cowards” then he probably never had a chance. Environment plays a big role in intelligence.
Hopefully he’ll get out in the world a bit and expand his horizons beyond mealy mouthed fake patriots and sloganeers.
Best of luck to him, and you.
I’m a firm believer in peace through strength as well. Oddly enough it brings me to support the opposite view that you take.
Strength is the ability to exert force, not the haphazard application of it.(IMHO)
Heck, I remember a FreeRepublic that bashed Bill Clinton, for sending troops overseas with vague intentions and attacked him for blowing up terrorist targets. And this was AFTER the first terrorist attack on the WTC and the terrorist attacks on the Cole and Khobar Towers, so there goes the "9-11 changed anything" excuse.
Ron Paul's just saying the exact same thing Republicans have been saying for years. He just didn't change his story to avoid disagreeing with another Republican.
Sure buddy, whatever you say.
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.