Posted on 12/29/2011 2:44:42 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Speaking on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor" Wednesday night, political strategist and best-selling author Dick Morris called Rep. Ron Paul's rise in the polling for the Iowa caucuses one of the most distressing political developments of the season.
Morris told substitute host Eric Bolling that it was "horrible" that Paul was doing so well. Several polls have him leading in Iowa, though in recent days former House Speaker Newt Gingrich seems to be mounting a comeback.
"I think that he is absolutely the most liberal, radical, left-wing person to run for president of the United States in the last 50 years," Morris said. "Nobody else wants to dismantle the military, including Obama, but he does. Even Obama doesn't want to repeal the Patriot Act. But he does.
"Even Obama doesn't say that we caused 9-11 and brought it on ourselves. But Ron Paul does. Even Obama doesn't want to legalize heroin and cocaine, but Ron Paul does. This guy is no conservative. This guy is a ultra, ultraleft-wing radical.
Bolling asked what happens if Paul wins at least 20 percent of the vote.
"I pray he doesn't," Morris said. "I pray the voters of Iowa recover their senses.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
heres betting Paul has lots of RAT financial support
Sorry to report that Dick Morris is a complete idiot on this issue, Ron Paul is not more liberal than Obama, he is a constitutionalist, or constructionist, but not a liberal.
Ron Paul actually is the only one that supports ALL of the US Constitution.
You are aboslutely, completely, and 100% correct.
Left toes or Right toes?
Man, Paul is threatening to derail the gravy train for these guys.
Ron Paul is a total fool on foreign policy. He does not understand Islam at all, but he sure as hell is not more liberal than Obama.
Morris has jumped the shark here.
I think that the terms are now so ambiguous to be meaningless. I suggest the terms tyrants and anarchists as the ends of the political spectrum. I realize that tyranny feeds off of anarchy and anarchy arises from tyranny but the terms are useful in locating where the inclination of particular legislator or candidate lies. I.E. Ron Paul is on the anarchy side of the spectrum and Obama is on the tyrant side. Newt and Mitt are too far on the tyrant side for my liking while Ron Paul fails to realize that without self-government the sudden lifting of tyrannical control will produce anarchy which is very likely to produce an even greater tyrannical response. Self-government is the missing essential element from all of the candidates, because self government only happens around ethical commitments that come from the Judeo-Christian faith. Those ethical commitments were abrogated from the civic discourse when the accompanying meta-physical claims were deemed inappropriate.
While I applaud Ron Paul for his commitment to liberty from a tyrannical state, he has absolutely no ability to bring it about. I believe much of his support is disillusionment with the rise of the power-class elites and the loss of influence of the ideals of liberty. But, the loss of liberty is but the shadow following the loss of faith. (see tag line)
RE: The Strait of Hormuz is a regional issue
Unfortunately we are not in the 19th century any longer.
The Strait of Hormuz is important because it is the only passage into the open ocean. It is used to help send the petroleum products from the oil producing countries around the world INCLUDING the USA. It is a KEY ROUTE for the world’s oil.
More than a third of the world’s tanker-borne oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz.
If you want allow a country to CUT OFF a major source of our oil supply, then go ahead, vote for Ron Paul.
Like I have said before: Ron Paul is so far to the right, he’s on the left.
RE: The Strait of Hormuz is a regional issue
Unfortunately we are not in the 19th century any longer.
The Strait of Hormuz is important because it is the only passage into the open ocean. It is used to help send the petroleum products from the oil producing countries around the world INCLUDING the USA. It is a KEY ROUTE for the world’s oil.
More than a third of the world’s tanker-borne oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz.
If you want allow a country to CUT OFF a major source of our oil supply, then go ahead, vote for Ron Paul.
Keep it going. All the GOP statists are outing themselves in their sudden terror that Paul might win Iowa. It’s a very useful way to compile a list for future reference.
Like it or not, what happens there has a profound effect on our everyday lives.
A Ron Paul presidency would outdo Obama and Carter combined, in Middle East mayhem.
Ron Paul probably is more radical than Obama on foreign policy issues, maybe a little more liberal or maybe a little less liberal on social issues, and far, far more conservative on economic issues.
Sure, but I'll go with the founders on Islamic interference with commerce. If force, without a "declaration" of war was OK for Jefferson, Adams and Madison, it's OK with me, even if it upsets the true arbiter of the Constitution from Tejas. After all, what did those founder guys know.
Morris is still mad that his hero Bill Clinton fired him.
Morris’ new hero is Willard the liberal, who, without a doubt, is the most liberal republican to ever run for the GOP nomination. No others even come close.
Ron Paul is a strict Constitutionalist. If it’s not in the Consitution, it is illegal in his eyes. He has never changed his positions. Other than his isolationalist foreign policy views, he has alot of good ideas, especially on the economy.
What bothers me about Ron Paul is his teaming up with Romney to destroy Newt’s chances. I would suspect Romney has promised him a cabinet position if he keeps up the heat on Gingrich and never says a word about Romney’s liberal positions on everything. I used to respect Paul for sticking up to his principles, but it’s obvious he’s the wingman for Willard the liberal in Iowa.
Yep. His legion of college age supporters can't be loaded enough to account for all the money his campaign has. Unless they're just adding it to their student loan tab and expect Obama to nullify that once Operation Occupy Republicans has succeeded.
Words like radical are not helpful nor descriptive of anything but one's emotional reaction. Paul is an isolationist and not a globalist. I think that he has no safe way of retreating at the present and so in that regard is dangerous to US interests. Of course we could be far more isolationist if we developed our own energy resources, but for the moment the EPA and Sierra Club have kept us dependent on foreign oil.
maybe a little less liberal on social issues
Again it is not helpful to say liberal when the term is not clearly defined. Paul desires less government control (at least federal) over the so called social issues. I detest his laissez faire on the sexual deviancy attacking the country from within.
...far more conservative on economic issues.
I think Paul sees the expression of our current tyranny in the economic control of the FED and the government. He is correct in this but unable to affect positive change. A vote for Ron Paul is a protest vote or perhaps a desire to influence the GOP platform. Let's face it the GOP has been all about slow government growth rather than small government. TO many Paul puts pressure on the GOP to reverse course and work for real reductions not just slower growth.
Why would a Paul Presidency automatically mean the Straits of Hormuz would be cut off? And where in the Constitution does it say that the American people have to expend blood and treasure to keep open the shipping lanes FOR OTHER COUNTRIES products. Let Saudi Arabia or the British or the Chinese keep those Straits open if they want to. I mean is the rest of the world completely helpless?
We have enough oil in our own country to supply our needs for hundreds of years, we are practically floating on the stuff, but the Globalists that control the major oil companies do not want us to be energy independent. The key route to the world's oil can and should be through our waters. Ron Paul, who actually believes in free enterprise, will allow real oil exploitation in this country and it won't really matter what happens in the Middle East.
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.