Posted on 12/21/2011 11:15:36 AM PST by Kaslin
Most people already know that Ron Paul refused to endorse John McCain in the 2008 general election. While I don’t necessarily agree with that decision, especially from a contender for the GOP nominee, I can certainly understand it. Lord knows I hated every nice thing I had to say about John McCain and wasn’t entirely pleased about pulling the lever for him (which is a dramatic understatement). Most people assume that Paul endorsed Libertarian candidate Bob Barr in 2008, which is partially true. However, that is not the entire story. Paul also endorsed three other candidates.
The first of those was Chuck Baldwin. I don’t really know a lot about Baldwin except that he has been on record early and often in support of the proposition that the South should have won the Civil War. This sort of thing would ordinarily disqualify most normal people from endorsing Chuck Baldwin, but Ron Paul is not most normal people. And given what most Ron Paul supporters seem willing to forgive, a little Confederate sympathy (or even a lot of Confederate sympathy) seems like small potatoes.
The second was Cynthia McKinney. Yes, you read that correctly, Ron Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney in 2008. For those who do not know, Cynthia McKinney is a certifiably insane anti-American anti-Semitic lunatic. She first came to widespread public attention when she was arrested for punching out a member of the capitol police who tried to stop her when she wasn’t wearing her pin. Cynthia McKinney is so crazy that she got defeated in a primary by a guy who thought Guam might tip over and capsize. McKinney was once arrested by the Israelis while trying to give aid to Hamas and penned a bizarre anti-American and anti-Israeli screed. See more of her anti-Americanism here.
Now, I know that the above is not necessarily persuasive to the average Ron Paul fan – after all, if they were bothered by siding with terrorists, they’d have probably jumped off the Paul bandwagon already. What is perhaps more important is that Cynthia McKinney is also next door to being a communist in terms of her domestic policy. McKinney is an open and avowed enemy of free market capitalism, preferring instead Ghadaffi-style socialism. Seriously, she literally and openly favors dictatorial socialism. McKinney ran on the Green Party ticket, whose platform explicitly includes guaranteed open-ended welfare (at a living wage) for everyone regardless of their ability or willingness to work, among other quasi-communist and far-left economic policies.
The fourth and final candidate Ron Paul endorsed for President was Ralph Nader. Yes, the same Ralph Nader who was so far to the left on economic matters that he could see no difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush. The same Ralph Nader who also longs for the day when the last vestiges of capitalism have died in America. Nader, you remember was the guy who made running as the Green Party candidate famous.
Why, you might ask, would Ron Paul, champion of economic freedom and limited government, endorse two avowed socialists for President? Well, you see, they signed a document:
Paul will offer this open endorsement to the four candidates because each has signed onto a policy statement that calls for “balancing budgets, bring troops home, personal liberties and investigating the Federal Reserve,” the Paul aide said.
You see, despite a lengthy and public history of supporting massive government expansion and infringement upon personal liberties, and despite running on a party platform that explicitly calls for the massive expansion of Government welfare, these people would clearly have been better at shrinking the government than the Republicans on the basis of signing this absurd pledge. To be fair, Paul was probably just following the Golden Rule here – after all, Paul had just spent the last two years being a truther in front of truthers and denying trutherism in front of the media, so he doubtless was extending the sort of blind eye towards Nader and McKinney’s insanity that he wished everyone else would turn towards his.
For whatever his failings as a Presidential candidate and conservative (and they were legion), no reasonable person would say that John McCain was worse than any of these clowns. It was one thing for Paul to not endorse McCain – but we have to ask what sort of person affirmatively supports anti-American avowed socialists and confederate sympathizers over a Republican? The answer: Someone who, like Howard Dean, hates Republicans and everything they stand for.
No no, he endorsed her. I agree with you though that nothing left needs to be said
That Kool-Aid must be tasting pretty damned good to post something like that.
[ Then, tell us why he took money from a former KKK Grand Wizard Don Black and posed for a picture with Black and his son? ]
OK I will... he needs money to run.. and he generally has no idea who contributes..
Maybe “the Devil” contributed as well.. still need some bucks..
Most if not all candidates have little idea who contributes.. even Zerodamus..
Yeah, look at all his Nazi and anarchists supporters down in Texas, who have repeatedly, over and over reelected him.
Their all Nazis, KKK members and anarchist down in Texas!
The current GOP? I despise Romney’s GOP, too. That is why I am not a Demonrat.
So, that justifies pandering to a known racist and former KKK Grand Wizard and getting his picture taken with him?
If you think so, you're out of your mind.
At best, Paul is incredibly stupid for posing for picture with him. But, his racist remarks in his newsletters, Israel bashing and Iran coddling tell me Paul and Black have a lot in common.
No such thing as a “small government leftist.”
He’s a libertarian in that he wants no rules concerning ethics in govenerment or American life. Would be a zombie society of darwin’s dreams.
Elvis was a dope fiend!
The people in Texas are evil!
Look at all his Nazi and anarchists supporters down in Texas, who have repeatedly, over and over reelected him.
Their all Nazis, KKK members and anarchist down in Texas!
To me a RINO is a republican politician who votes mostly with the rats
lol...
[ So, that justifies pandering to a known racist and former KKK Grand Wizard and getting his picture taken with him? ]
PANDERING!?.... <- that resembles a lie...
Not an outright lie but to.. something implied that didn’t happen..
Pretty sneaky.. are you a democrat?..
Surely you don’t think Paul believes the things Black believes..
Black believes Obama is a disaster for other reasons than I do..
But we agree on that.. what does that make ((( ME ))) knucklehead!.. a racist?..
I spent the last few weeks in southwest AZ, and saw more Ron Paul bumper stickers than anyone else’s. There was even a Ron Paul booth at one of the street fairs, 3 stalls down from the NRA.
Like him or not, he does have a following.
Is that so radical? Then why hasn’t anybody done it?
It is difficult to impossible to actually state which programs you will cut before the election is held, because that is telling certain voters, “Do Not Vote For Me!” If you tell enough voters that, you wind up not getting elected. If you don't get elected all you can do is sit on your hands for the next four years while Obama continues his destruction of the American economy.
That’s the “big tent” theory, but in the direction of constituencies, instead of for other groups. However, it remains only a theory, because the Republican leadership will never, ever, try to prove or disprove it.
A candidate can be very general about cutting during the campaign, but if he is firm that he *will* cut, and deeply, it will not hurt him politically, *unless*, after elected, he goes back on his pledge.
The problem is with the RINOs in the senate and house who will try very hard to block such cuts. But the response of the elected president can be very firm, and is reminiscent of the saying, “If nominated I will not run, and if elected, I will not serve.”
But in this case, the president would demand of congress that they *not* appropriate money for a given list of agencies, and that the appropriation bill for those agencies be clumped together, so they will fail as a group.
And, he can use the threat that if congress still appropriates money for those agencies, he will withhold it, so while the agencies employees will still be paid, the agency itself will do nothing.
“If you offer to fund these agencies, I will reject the funding. And if you fund anyway, I will not spend those monies.”
Ron Paul would make for a useful protest vote. The rest of the Republican field is nothing to brag about. I think we may have to have a brokered convention.
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.