Republicans and Democrats, Please Protect Us from Ron Paul!

http://www.nolanchart.com/article428.html ^ | December 9, 2007 | Grizzle Griz

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

Ron Paul is a 72-year-old dark horse, long-shot libertarian Republican with a longhorse, quixotic-shot bid for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. As an obstetrician, he has delivered ten babies and he has served over 4,000 terms in Congress. Because he advocates trade, negotiation, and overall positive relationships with other nations, he is a strict isolationist.

Paul's foreign policies are backward like Colin Powell's in 2002. He believes the Bush Administration should pursue Osama Bin Laden rather than lure him into Iraq where he will, no doubt, turn himself into the authorities any day. He refuses to respect Halliburton's sovereign right to govern and to boost the American economy by charging the military $96 for each bag of laundry. There is no doubt that if Paul were President, he would force the troops to shower in warm, transparent water instead of the tasty green stuff government contractors currently provide with impunity.

Paul's economic policies are reactionary: hailing from the colonial times when Ronald Regan was the President. He has a strange disdain for everything America loves including budget deficits, bureaucratic mismanagement, the destabilization of the dollar, and the complete implosion of the Enron-like structure of Social Security. He wants to remove the capital gains taxes on hard assets like gold and silver, which has not been proposed by any serious economist since a November, 2007 interview with Alan Greenspan. On the other hand, Paul's opponents have demonstrated certain financial aptitude and have been endorsed by such economic heavyweights as Pat Robertson and Chuck Norris.

His affiliation with the Republican Party is equally laughable. By adhering to its core principles he represents its radical fringe. Having spent one year in the libertarian party and seventy-two in the Republican Party, it is questionable where his loyalties truly lie.

He is rightly ignored by the troops. Although the FEC reports that Dr. Paul has received more money than any other candidate from veterans and active-duty personnel, his opponents, who don't believe in conspiracies, know his supporters simply colluded with the FEC to deceive the public. Now they infiltrate the military, don their uniforms, and shoot support videos in helicopters and on tanks. Youtube should screen these videos for authenticity.

His supporters can be even more dangerous. They bring heated debates to political blogs and news columns, which were once serene and comfortable forums to trade baking recipes. His entire support consists of three potheads and one neo-Nazi who each raided their mother's purses to contribute 15 million dollars over the course of his campaign. The neo-Nazi personally endorsed Dr. Paul on his website as well as Jesus Christ and the value of eating leafy green vegetables. Like Dr. Paul, the Savior and the spinach industry have refused to disassociate themselves from the obnoxiously-attenuated connection.

Perhaps the most alarming aspect of Dr. Paul is that he, himself believes in conspiracies. In June, he was recorded on camera saying "hmm" to a spokesman for the 9/11 Truth group. He has also stated that some people may be ideologically driven to advocate for a North American Union and highway. It is preposterous to think that giant American corporations could benefit from an inflow of cheap labor and lower import tariffs. Los Angeles Times columnist, Stephen Braun, proved Paul was wrong by interviewing three men filling potholes on Interstate 5. "There is no such highway" they all explained, replacing future tense with present.

Jeffrey Toobin, a CNN post-debate analyst explained that this means Paul believes in magical "dark forces". He could not bless viewers with more insight, because CNN had to switch to a special Lou Dobbs report on the proposal for a NAFTA superhighway.

No doubt, Dr. Paul will be forgotten along with such political lightweights as Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and Thomas Jefferson, who preached identical views. The Republican Party should do its best to eliminate this threat of future success by disenfranchising an entire generation of newfound Republicans who were previously under the impression that they had to be Democrats to be right. This will protect the next generation from the blame for delivering a neglected, broken economy and a government that is $10 trillion in debt. And they will, no doubt, thank the current Republican Party for replacing political theory with Jesus.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

Ping!

[RegulatorCountry]

As an obstetrician, he has delivered ten babies and he has served over 4,000 terms in Congress

My goodness. Ron Paul is over 8,000 years old?

[Oberon]

hee hee hee!

Now that's a winner.

[Oberon]

My goodness. Ron Paul is over 8,000 years old?

Looks good for his age, don't you think? I wouldn't say he looks a day over 2500.

[saganite]

You know, as a closet libertarian I support most of Ron Paul’s positions but his call for surrender in Iraq is a showstopper for me. I hope his positions on smaller govt resonate with the electorate. I can definitely get behind that.

[RegulatorCountry]

Looks good for his age, don't you think?

Well, you would too, if you'd only delivered ten babies in 80 centuries. Some kind of obstetrician he is.

[abigailsmybaby]

I’ll say one thing about Paul...if he did by some miracle become President his veto pen would be red hot and smokin’.

[Mr. Jeeves]

You know, as a closet libertarian I support most of Ron Paul’s positions but his call for surrender in Iraq is a showstopper for me.

Are you sure that's what he has called for? Or is that what a lot of histrionic FReepers say he has called for?

Upon closer inspection, you may find that much prevailing opinion around here on a variety of topics is based on misunderstandings and emotional overreactions by the perpetually outraged. ;)

[saganite]

His thoughts on the war pretty much mirror the Democrats recommmendations and I consider those a recipe for “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory”. That’s a very good book by the way.

[Chi-townChief]

What got me is how Paul said we have to be careful not to offend the Islamists and, domestically, how he’s backing away from eliminating the income.

[mnehring]

Cute attempt to boost Fraud Paul-

Don't be fooled.. Paul is no Conservative. Votes speak louder than rhetoric.

Ron Paul's 2006 American Conservative Union rating: 76% Lifetime Rating: 82.3%

Ron Paul's Voting Record (ya, ya, I know, there is an excuse for all of these, state's rights are more important than stopping abortion and fixing the border, Ronnie is making a statement, or everyone else was voting against it and he was just playing the game, yadda, yadda, yadda)

Here are some more ‘Conservative(sic)’ votes by Paul:

Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes.

Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.

Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion.

Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons.

Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime.

Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism.

Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools.

Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy.

Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy.

Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.

Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects.

Voted NO on reforming the UN by restricting US funding.

Voted NO on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations.

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits about obesity against food providers.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.

Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.

Voted NO on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers.

Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers.

Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients.

Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks.

Let's also not forget Paul's Pork Projects (that he voted for before he voted against when he calls them unconstitutional but he is just playing the game when he submits them because everyone else does it.. yadda yadda yadda..)

Paul also supported the NAU superhighway by funding the TransTexas Corridor

[mnehring]

I am kind of curious, what is ONE bill Paul has passed that promotes Conservative values?

[Oberon]

I am kind of curious, what is ONE bill Paul has passed that promotes Conservative values?

Heh, good one. That's like saying "What ONE house has Ron Paul burned down to promote fire safety?" Conservative values are not promoted by passing laws, but by repealing them.

[RDTF]

*snicker*

[AuntB]

“I am kind of curious, what is ONE bill Paul has passed that promotes Conservative values?”

Beats me. He’s never gotten on piece of his own legislation through the process. He’s co sponsored 1876 other people’s bills in the last ten years. Which is ironic, since the Paul people tell us he is the ONLY one in congress who ever writes anything ‘constitutional’, yet he supports more other bills than the average congressman.

Go figure.

[Red6]

Ron Paul is politically a featherweight and on issues he’s neither liberal nor conservative. The best fitting word for Ron Paul as a description is “obstructionist.”

For more factual information please refer to his voting record:
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296

[marsh_of_mists]

How is he backing away from that? He may be realistic about the president’s potential ability to do that, but you can blame Congress for that one.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

I’ve heard many others say that, and I’ll say to you the same thing I said to them: Ron Paul has proven to be right time and time again, and George W. Bush has proven to be a big-government socialist who will sell out conservatives. What is it about Iraq that makes it the one thing Paul is wrong about and Bush is right about?

[tacticalogic]

the Paul people tell us he is the ONLY one in congress who ever writes anything ‘constitutional’,

Interesting. Can you give me a link to "the Ron Paul people" saying this? I'd like to see that.