Posted on 12/30/2011 4:44:05 PM PST by dragnet2
With respect to the former, it is amusing to see tin foil hats on those who wield the word “kook” with little or no thought. The slightest intimation that he would scale back our military footprint, and all of a sudden he's a total pacifist. Sorry pal. I've never been a lemming, and don't plan on becoming one.
Empowering the Leftist-controlled Departments of Energy, Education, Health and Human Services, or Labor would be a bad thing - so we should give the money to honorable and independent-minded military men like Wesley Clark and Eric Shinseki, instead. :)
The poster walked right by it.
Sorry pal. I've never been a lemming, and don't plan on becoming one.
Agree.
The political group think groupies are basically told what to think, and they buy it, hook line and sinker.
“By the way, I have no idea if PolitiFact is legitimate or credible...”
Then why post this obvious leftist propaganda ?
I’d also like to add to your fine list:
8. Pierre Laval- style treason and appeasement.
The issues I regard as important are: the babies, marriage being preserved as an institution limited to one man and one woman per marriage, guns, military superiority, the use of the military as warranted by the interests of the US not as micromanaged by the Neville Chamberlain/George McGovern/paleoPaulie school of institutionalized cowardice as public policy.
On those issues, I will imagine, until anyone proves otherwise, that Ron Paul, the paleosurrenderman, is sound only on guns. Of course, he might want at some point to extend his castrating of the military to the individual citizen as well. Even I doubt that.
As for smaller government, fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, etc., Ron Paul is one of the pork kings of DC, stuffing shrimping subsidies, nursing scholarships, transportation subsidies and an infinite variety of what he would otherwise be claiming as "unconstitutional" spending sprees for his Galveston constituents into every Appropriations bill, then posing for holy pictures as he votes against each and every Appropriations bill, flush with the knowledge that he can have it both ways as his colleagues are sure to vote through his pork in order to get their own. He is a liar and a fraud on these issues.
Now, taking Ron Paul's abject worship of the long-ignored Tenth Amendment into consideration, will he, as POTUS, REFUSE to authorize Social Security checks, payments to doctors and hospitals and pharmacies for medical services and prescription drugs? Will it be up to the states to take up the slack or shall the retirees either starve homeless in the streets or die from lack of medical care? Assuming that these programs violate the Tenth Amendment as presumably they do, what is Ron Paul planning on doing by way of a substitute: encourage people to contribute to private charities to help the aged? Raise state and local taxes to the skies to make up the difference? Create camps (on a state and local basis of course) to house the elderly so that they may die quietly (and as swiftly as possible) out of the public eye? Don't take the coward's way out and refuse to answer the questions in this paragraph.
Presumably. welfare of any sort will also be deemed a violation of the Tenth almighty. When Paulie refuses any authorization for payment of welfare checks, food stamps, Medicaid, housing, Section 8, etc., won't we need a robust military to quell the resulting riots?
Is it conservative, in any cognizable sense to do these things all at once? After all, the Tenth almighty is the Tenth almighty!!! The mere fact that we have spent 220+ years or so building up an incredibly vast network of spending programs in violation of the Tenth almighty and that the lives of a clear majority of Americans have been arranged accordingly should not count, should it?
Now, you don't suppose in your wildest imaginations that Obozo will refrain from making the arguments in this post and many, many more, do you? If (and this is hilariously unlikely to the max) Paulie the paleosurrenderman were to be nominated by the GOP, he would probably turn Obozo into the all-time vote-getting champion of American history even if we are mired in a Depression on election day twice as bad as we are now. Paul would get no more than 20% of the vote and probably a lot less when the necessary implications of his delusions on matters of government programs sink in.
All Goldwater (social revolutionary babykiller) did to get himself in trouble was tell elders in Florida that Social Security should be abolished, defense workers in Texas that overtime in the defense industries should be more fairly allocated, and to voters in Tennessee that TVA should be abolished. Those three positions put Goldwater in the same historical trashbin as McGovern and his pro-communist peacecreepism, Alf Landon, and Walter Mondale.
PaleoPaulie would take Goldwater's heresies and add them to McGovern's anti-American peacecreepism to see if he can set a new record for political futility and stupidity. He would also add Goldwater's cheerleading for homosexuality and babykilling (at least by making the federales butt out) which were less obvious in 1964.
Maybe, if the paleosurrenderman REALLY cared about his signature government accountability issue: auditing the Federal Reserve System and making the Fed accountable, he would use the power he already possesses as a senior GOP Congressman on the relevant committee to actually DO something instead of terminally yakking us all to death about what he thinks (assuming that he thinks) and what he believes. We are electing a POTUS not a wannabe philosopher king and hopefully not a Klan and Nazi coddling liar and fraud like Ron Paul.
The notion of Ron Paul as "personal" responsibility advocate is to ludicrous to consider. He did not write those newsletters. He never read those newsletters. He is pro-life but does not want the central government to be pro-life. He is pro-family but does not want, etc. He wants to hold the Fed accountable but does not want to actually DO anything to make them accountable. He wants to cut government spending but not to his own district and votes against his pork while raking it in.
Ron Paul is a crackpot and a loon and a moonbat and makes the late Harold Stassen seem like a responsible and even electable POTUS candidate. He no longer runs as a Libertoonian candidate because he knows that that line on the ballot will get him about 1% of the vote which is 1% more than his insanity deserves. PaleoPaulie patented the tin foil hat and produces them in sufficient numbers to cover the heads of his college zombie and libertoonian followers.
Fester: you ARE a lemming and that does not change just because you refuse to recognize and admit it. Whatever Paul may say, he clearly does not care any more for 50+ million aborted babies or the destruction of marriage as we know it or for the lives of the citizens of Israel or for most other conservative concerns than he does for a rat's patoot.
I have not misinterpreted him nor overreacted to him. He is the worst POS to seek a GOP POTUS nomination in the party's history. I refuse to be his spin artist or his press spokesman and, as a Republican, I won't be his fall guy either.
We now have troops in Mabo Mumbo Africa, close to the Congo. You support that?
Then why post this obvious leftist propaganda?
Post it!
BTW, the interests of the US are those interests that OUR reliable leaders alone determine without help from the UN, from regional treaty organizations, and from diployakkers of any kind. Our interests, purely because we unilaterally SAY so and act accordingly. For instance, if "Mabo Mumbo" has natural deposits of material useful in the development of nuclear weapons (as might be useful to Iran or Outer Nowheristan or Inner Kabukidancistan or whomever) then yes we have an interest in keeping them disarmed and helpless and unable to harm American interests.
If, OTOH, Mabo Mumbo has not been sufficiently Marxist or has not killed enough Christians or Jews or whomever to satisfy Obozo or Bill Ayres, then no, we need not be involved.
I don't suppose that Mabo Mumbo is the location where Obozo sent American forces to assist the genocidal "Army of the Lord, or is it? In which case, no. Obozo's views, particularly as to "anticolonial" movements in Africa belong in tragicomic opera and not in American history.
I also note that you did not answer the questions about Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.
Where'd ya go Mr. Elk?
The hyperventilating hyperbole over Ron Paul is fun to watch, but in the scheme of things Ron Paul is not worth getting one’s panties in a twist. I will join you in working toward a country where strong defense and high moral fiber are the rule and not the exception, while at the same time take advantage of every opportunity to lessen the impact of federal meddling in private affairs.
State of Texas ranks 41st in total pork this year, and you write as if it was all Ron Paul's and therefore disqualifies him as a GOP candidate. Quit already. I deal in facts, not hyperbole. It is incumbent upon every member of the house to act in the interests of his constituency in obtaining a portion of available financial resources. Did he use this spending to ingratiate himself to people who will vote him into office again? His so called pork bills are predominantly related to energy and transportation - legitimate interests in which the people of Texas as a whole share. Care to rank him among the whole of congress in terms of pork?
On and on it goes. Knee-jerkism to the 10th degree. What a hoot to see all the big cheesers soil themselves at the notion the people of this land are getting more serious when it comes to limits on federal power.
When your a current and historic flip-flopping political opportunist the quality of being an "insider" takes on a slightly less positive meaning.
Do you, like your treasonweasel idol and 9/11 troofer El Run lack courage so that you refuse to answer as to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and paleoPaulie's plans for how they will be replaced? If they will be replaced?
As to the homeless, the jobless and the looted investments, I have looked in vain through the Constitution and find no references to them. As to foreign policy, it would be better carried out by simply laying waste to our enemies, killing them and breaking their things and not engaging in nation building. Hopefully. the government will finally learn the economical way to wage the wars that we deem necessary.
Wars waged by the US make clear that we ought not be lightly regarded by those who aspire to be our enemies. If we wage them simply to kill and destroy, we will do that even better.
Your turn to answer. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Where'd ya go, Dragnet???
You will also search in vain for any support by me of bailing out banks, fat corporations or the paleosurrenderman and his earmark gobbling special interests, with any, much less trillions, of taxpayer dollars. BTW, he catches hell for his dishonest behavior on earmarks because he CLAIMS to be against wasting tax dollars while stuffing his district’s special interests with them.
The hoot will be when we crush that phony little bastard treasonweasel once and for all in 2012 and drive him from public life.
You know what JimRob thinks of paleoPaulie's spam monkeys and he is right.
I would translate your opposition to "federal meddling in private affairs" to be a backhanded endorsement of babykilling via abortion and of "gay""marriage" which allows, BTW, the government employed perverts to add their shackups to their employment health insurance policies and pensions and social security accounts at OUR expense. Dreaming up new ways to squander tax dollars is hardly an example of the fiscal conservatism that El Run fraudulently claims.
El Run catches hell for his porking up the Appropriations bills with Galveston pork because he regularly and fraudulently CLAIMS to be a fiscal conservative and stuffs bills with his pork so that his similarly pork-obsessed colleagues will enact his pork to get their own. This is not unlike his rank phonyism as a "pro-lifer" and pro-family guy" while he opposes all federal pro-life and pro-family efforts. He is a fraud and a phony.
I looked at my constitution again and found no reference to energy or transportation. Maybe you can show me where they are? I didn't think so.
I quite favor limits on federal power. I would start by abolishing the Departments of Edumakashun, Energy and Housing. It should not be hard to find a trillion in non-military actual cuts before lunch. Diployakkers are another target. No more Chateau Lafitte 1929, first class air fares, world class hotels or utterly unnecessary diployak at all. Turn Foggy Bottom into a very low cost discount operation with few responsibilities. They accomplish little anyhow (at least until someone like John Bolton is Secretary of State). Whoever is POTUS can confine Mr. and Mrs. POTUS and the family to "vacationing" at Camp David. And POTUS can pay his own links fees if he/she simply must play golf. Put college and university faculties on a starvation regimen by ending federal subsidies for college loans and it would be a great idea to start with September, 2012, when my youngest heads off to a private college. Just what these kids are supposed to be getting for $40,000 a year tuition is beyond me. We are probably witnessing the last generation of brick and mortar college students. The college I attended is now paying its president more than a million dollars a year. he is not the only college president making that kind of money, either. Puhleeze!!! In the 1970s, that college paid its classroom teachers no more than $25,000 per year and numbers of them were quite competent.
Meanwhile, having answered your questions several times, let's hear about what the paleosurrenderman is planning for replacing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. I am not going to let that go until you answer.
Of course transportation and energy are not enumerated in the Constitution specifically, but as we the people aim for freedom and prosperity our resources are combined. Transportation and energy fall under the “common good.” I think that's in there somewhere.
Actually, I'd like to be in a position to DARE any enemy to fight on our soil as opposed to invite them. I don't understand the knee jerk response to any suggestion it may have been our foreign policy in the first place that invited 9/11. I don't run the State Department, CIA, FBI, etc., but the older I get the more convinced I become there are folks holding power that are not acting in our best interests around the globe.
In view of all the power we've granted the fed without accountability I refuse to dismiss our own culpability in inviting those attacks. For some reason the barriers between actual statements from our enemies and our government are buried and not accessible to my direct perusal, but I've got plenty of armchair emotional responses to entertain.
May you and yours be safe, prosperous, and blessed in times ahead.
LOL. I forgot to address this. Must plead ignorance in terms of Ron Paul's plans for these programs. But "several" in my book means at least seven, and you've not posted to me more than three or four so far, if that. It would not bother me in the least if Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were phased out or summarilty abolished. I plan to trust in God, live free, and die in the harness, if that's okay with you. Or is that "insane" and "kooky," like the fellows who planned this country with an eye toward Divine Providence?
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.