I try to be fair and even here to discus topics that FR brings to light to further knowledge and personal wisdom. However, anyone who hasn't figured out by now that Paul is a mental case is not paying attention. I'm voting for Newt, as I have consistently said since the begining when there were 8, but if you want to vote for Santorum, that's fine by me. Now that leaves Mitt and Paul. Try to imagine Mitt against Obama. He is the architect of Obama care and I don't think anyone can wiggle out of that piece of film that will be showed on a loop for months. He voted for an gun ban, abortion, and gay marriage. Many would even say he's not a Christian. He's a loser against Obama. It will be the same as McCain or Dole. Just a bunch of mush against a Socialist/Marxist. Then you have Paul. He's a mental case. I live in Texas and he was my congressman for awhile till I moved. I've tried to be a libertarian, but just can't get past the platform. It's a bunch of ideological claptrap that has NO practical application. So far we have been talking about right and wrong ideals that we could survive if we were wrong. Paul, OTOH, would allow a nuke to explode in NYC to make a point. He's not rational. This goes beyond some founding Father ideal that he has misread. It is sheer lunacy. He has no clue what the 12th Imam is or what they play's in Shiite religion. They aren't like the N. Koreans or the Russians, who might not want to die. Iranians have already made the statement they are willing to lose 60 million to attack Israel because that guarantee's paradise for them. You can't treat Iran like you would the Soviet Union because they are mentally ill and WANT to die for the cause. Paul doesn't get that. He's an idiot. He and you, believe you have the inside track on the Founders and the Constitution, but in fact we attacked the Barbary Pirates early in our history and had many military adventures in the early days of the Republic. I know what Washington said in his Farewell speech and it was wonderful, but you can't defend the country without putting some lead downrange.
You are just misinformed if you think Newt would "tinker" with the EPA, or anything else. Newt IS the change agent you are looking for, but you are so stuck on a madman, you haven't bothered to look at the other candidates. Paul hasn't got a chance in hell of getting past 3rd place anywhere and if we nominate him, he will lose so big it will be embarrassing. Wishing it wasn't that way won't get him elected and will most assuredly result in another 4 for Obama.
If you don't like Newt, fine for for Mitt or Santorum, but it is lunacy to even think that Paul has a chance in hell. Mitt will lose to Obama because he is a RINO from Massachusetts. That leaves Santorum and Newt. Santorum will lose because he is a loser from Penn that backs the unions. I would hate to see another 4 years of Obama because Newt got a divorce. The safety of the country comes first in my book.
posted on 01/21/2012 2:23:53 PM PST
Well Damn! I like you and that was just such a great post.
Well thought out.
posted on 01/21/2012 3:49:57 PM PST
(Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
Paul has some useful attributes, and could be useful in the new Conservative administration if he can be placed in a position of power that can benefit from those attributes, and CONTROLLED. Like Fed oversight, or elimination thereof.
posted on 01/21/2012 4:30:07 PM PST
(The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
posted on 01/21/2012 6:39:31 PM PST
by little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson