Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why a Tea Party conservative now supports Ron Paul...including his foreign policy
American Thinker ^ | 12/16/2011 | Russ Paladino

Posted on 12/16/2011 7:48:40 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Ask any conservative about Ron Paul and you will usually hear the following statement: "I love him on fiscal policy but his foreign policy is naive and dangerous." You can also throw in the obligatory "He hates Israel." If someone had asked me about Paul from 9/12/01 through October of 2011, I'd have said the exact same things.

Something about my certitude always felt a bit uncomfortable, though, because I admired the "good parts" of Ron Paul (and later, his son Rand). Having participated in the Tea Party movement since its inception, and then witnessing the phony propaganda concocted to invalidate it, my BS meter began to pin whenever I heard (or spoke) harsh rhetoric denouncing Ron Paul. Since the contradiction bugged me, I decided to take the advice of my twenty-year-old son and read Ron Paul's book, Revolution. This required me to consider ideas which were once unthinkable. I undertook the mission with the promise to think outside my conservative box.

After reading the book, I came away with a completely different understanding of Ron Paul and his philosophy. I'm hoping my Tea Party compatriots, fellow conservatives, and all Americans will step outside their own comfort zones to do the same. It is vital that our nation seriously consider the important constitutional concepts and defense of liberty that Ron Paul espouses.

Today, the Middle East is falling to Islamic rule like a series of dominos. The supposed "friendly Arab nations" want our troops out of their land and threaten to side with our enemies. Our soldiers are hamstrung by politically correct rules of engagement that make them sitting ducks. Our economy is collapsing under the weight of our debt (a good portion of which goes to fund our worldwide military adventures),

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: foreignpolicy; galvestonsnoopy; rino; ronpaul; spotthelooney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

1 posted on 12/16/2011 7:48:51 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Must be a membeer of the decaffeinated Tea Party?


2 posted on 12/16/2011 7:52:08 AM PST by Leep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Five reasons...

1. Because anyone can call themselves a member of the “Tea Party.”
2. Anyone can claim to be a conservative.
3. Mental illness.
4. Islamophilia (See #3).
5. Hatred of Jews/Israel (See #3).


3 posted on 12/16/2011 7:53:01 AM PST by peyton randolph (B. Hussein Obama solved Bush's "problem" of a AAA credit rating)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Then it is simple he is not a conservative. Bachmann had it exactly right last night. Paul is DANGEROUS! Period end of story.
4 posted on 12/16/2011 7:53:01 AM PST by mk2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The thing that really frightens me about this Ron Paul character is that he might run as an independent. We have enough people who are short on thought to throw the election to Obama by voting for independent Ron Paul. Apparently, the Ross Perot lesson was not received or was not understood.


5 posted on 12/16/2011 7:54:46 AM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; BlackElk; lormand; Allegra; Absolutely Nobama

Russ Paladino has been a Paultard for a long time. At that, he posts an article like this every few months, playing the ‘I just discovered Paul’ lie..

Sounds like those seminar callers to Rush. I used to support X but then I started listening to Gandalf...err, I mean Paul...


6 posted on 12/16/2011 7:54:54 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
Russ Paladino has been a Paultard for a long time.

Thanks, I guessed that was the case. These pinheads are just too obvious with their make-believe conversions.

7 posted on 12/16/2011 7:57:09 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Love Rand.

Would love to see him in cabinet.


8 posted on 12/16/2011 7:57:36 AM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I'll paraphrase Mister Paul from the debates last evening...

The only reason that other countries want to attack us is because we have a strong defense.

Which is precisely what every Marxist/liberal sociology prof has been saying for generations, and is...

Precisely, 180 degrees incorrect.

No legitimate Tea Partier supports Paul.

.

9 posted on 12/16/2011 7:57:45 AM PST by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

figures


10 posted on 12/16/2011 7:57:45 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He would be an ineffective president simply because congress would shut him down at every turn.

On the other hand, that might not be such a bad thing.


11 posted on 12/16/2011 7:58:24 AM PST by cripplecreek (Stand with courage or shut up and do as you're told.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ron Paul is not a conservative. As a matter of fact, I don’t know what he is. He is so far to the right, he is on the left. The universe is not flat.


12 posted on 12/16/2011 7:58:43 AM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ron Paul is a Libertarian that could not win as a Libertarian so he joined the GOP. He is not a conservative. I want a conservative candidate for the GOP.


13 posted on 12/16/2011 8:00:04 AM PST by frogjerk (OBAMA NOV 2012 = HORSEMEAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If it came down to it, I’d rather have Ron Paul than Mitt Romney.


14 posted on 12/16/2011 8:00:16 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

What really frightens me is that he has a large youth following who have turned it into a cult. They all are worshiping at the alter of a guy ‘from the government who is here to help’. They weigh everything they believe about the government and the Constitution on what Paul says about it instead of picking it up themselves and reading it or grabbing the Federalist papers. They are worshiping at the feet of a career politician and are actually excited to send their money to someone in the government. They are selling their personal possessions and spending all their time in the service of him.

It really is a cult. Replace Ron Paul with Fred Phelps or David Koresh and the Constitution with the Bible and the the feel of the rhetoric would be indistinguishable.

They say it is just passion for ‘freedom and liberty’ but it has well crossed that line when they sacrifice their own individuality for a politician. They have long crossed the line from passion to obsession.


15 posted on 12/16/2011 8:00:16 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This whole meme that Paul is a Tea Party favorite is a canard. Last poll on this topic showed that Paul garners a whopping 7% support.

TEA PARTY SUPPORTER %:

Newt Gingrich 47%
Mitt Romney 17%
Michele Bachmann 8%
Rick Perry 7%
Ron Paul 7%
Rick Santorum 4%
Jon Huntsman <1%
Other/Any/None 11%

Gallup Daily Tracking. Dec 1-5, 2011

This writer is a dopey Paultard.


16 posted on 12/16/2011 8:03:44 AM PST by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I've seen a lot of FReepers say they like Paul's domestic policies, but can't stand his foreign policy.

And I've tended to agree. He's far more of an isolationist than I would otherwise think is prudent.

That said, there is no otherwise. Nobody else is advocating the kind of cuts in government Paul is, and without cuts of that magnitude, we're going to be broke sooner rather than later.

In other words, we're either going to be isolationists because Paul implements it - something we could change after 4 or 8 years, or we're going to be isolationists because we're flat broke and our economy has collapsed to the point we will be impotent on the world stage.

If it's the latter, then we sure as heck aren't going to be able to change our minds after 4 or 8 years and have a more activist foreign policy.

Those are the choices as I see it. We're too far along to pretend that a few bandaids on the economy are going to turn it around. If it means 4 or 8 years of a little extra chaos in the world (and, honesly, can he do that much worse than Obama?) to get us patched up, that's a far better choice than chaos for the next 50 or 100 years because the U.S. ceases to exist as a world power.
17 posted on 12/16/2011 8:06:06 AM PST by chrisser (Starve the Monkeys!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The unintentionally funniest moment of the debate last night was Mr. "Sometimes I'm the only one voting my way" talking about working across the aisle and getting the left and the right to work together.

Ummm . . . hey loony Paul, if you can't even convince a single person in your party to vote with you, how can you possibly believe that you can convince a coalition to vote your way??? LOL!!

The sheer irrationality of Paul supporters is astounding.
18 posted on 12/16/2011 8:06:20 AM PST by Sudetenland (Anybody but Obama!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

the sad part is I actually got some Paultards to pick up the "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" phrase- they had no clue

19 posted on 12/16/2011 8:10:23 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
Ya gotta be kidding me!!? Most of us here don't want Romney but you have to at least admit Romney is not a blame America firster. Not to mention the Anti Semitisim and the racism in Paul's newsletter and the fact that he doesn't believe that Iran wants to wipe out any country that doesn't share their despicable beliefs. Ron Paul belongs with the Shelia Jackson Lee's of the Congress a nutbag who is dangerous and has way to much power and influence.
20 posted on 12/16/2011 8:11:07 AM PST by mk2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty

“If it came down to it, I’d rather have Ron Paul than Mitt Romney.”

Have to disagree, Romneys self deluded but at least he’s not insane.


21 posted on 12/16/2011 8:12:42 AM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Still say Paul has a mental problem.


22 posted on 12/16/2011 8:13:11 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He’s the scary uncle that comes over for Sunday dinner and leers at the kids. He’s a humorous addition to the otherwise dull boring debates. He gives one or two really good ideas and then blows it on other topics.


23 posted on 12/16/2011 8:16:18 AM PST by SkyDancer ("If You Want To Learn To Love Better, You Should Start With A Friend Who You Hate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
we're either going to be isolationists because Paul implements it - something we could change after 4 or 8 years, or we're going to be isolationists because we're flat broke

Very well said. And it's something that many here choose not to see.

24 posted on 12/16/2011 8:18:21 AM PST by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
Nobody else is advocating .....

The key here is he is 'talking', but he has shown through his three decades in office he is no more effective as the guy in the corner of a coffee shop rambling about the ills of the world. He has been a failure on the economic front as well. He has authored something like 470 bills and only a couple have even made it to the floor for a vote. The ones that did pass were minor little things like honoring a baseball pitcher in his district.

A lot of people say they like Paul on economics, but look at what he has done when he has a chance. Right now, Paul is in the best seat possible to prove he is more than words. He is the chairman of the banking and monetary policy committee. The Committee that oversees everything he claims to want to fix- even the Fed. He has the authority to put actions behind his words and you know what he has done- Jack and Squat.

No subpoenas, no investigations, no investigators. He had one meeting he ended up canceling- and the witnesses in that meeting, a guy who wrote a book on Southern succession and a blogger.

Phil Gramm put it well a long time ago when he said that Paul could never get a bill passed because they couldn't even get out of committee because they were so poorly written and lacked any detail as to 'how'. Just big pronouncements.

Let's take it one step further. What is the Constitutional role of President? Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. Budget and taxes start in Congress. If Paul is so great on economics but poor on foreign policy, why would you take him out of the role where he is great and put him in the role where is is piss poor?

25 posted on 12/16/2011 8:19:12 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
we're either going to be isolationists because Paul implements it - something we could change after 4 or 8 years, or we're going to be isolationists because we're flat broke

Very well said. And it's something that many here choose not to see.

26 posted on 12/16/2011 8:22:14 AM PST by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph

Good. You are putting your finger on the core problem with Paul. Paul is practically a ‘Truther’ when he said that Bush was filled with ‘glee’ when 9/11 happenned. He has closely allied himself with some very weird people that believe in worldwide conspiracies by Jewish bankers.

Without a doubt, there have been corrupt and evil bankers that have de-stabilized the financial system. But there is no secret conspiracy that has united George Bush (and other mainline rinos) with George Soros and his allies in an effort to create a one world government that will de-populate the planet by 90%. There is such conspiratorial activity on the Left however. The conspiratorial theory that unites establishment Republicans with radical Leftists does not seem logical when one considers that the MSM only promotes and protects the power of radical Leftists. If the MSM were under the control of this universal and centrally coordinated effort, they would have protected George Bush, and they certainly did not do that.


27 posted on 12/16/2011 8:22:14 AM PST by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est; zero sera dans l'enfer bientot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mk2000

Someone has to eviscerate the beast of big government. Romney obviously isn’t going to do that.

I don’t like Ron Paul on foreign policy either. But as far as I’m concerned, at this particular juncture in history, the US Federal Government poses a far bigger threat to the safety and security of this country than Iran.


28 posted on 12/16/2011 8:25:45 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

The way the government is supposed to work is that the people are supposed to petition congress to write the legislation and pass the bills.

Obamite’s want the president to usurp the roll of the people. That is the foundation of dictatorship.


29 posted on 12/16/2011 8:25:45 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All
If there was one other candidate in the running who was clearly in favor of fighting only when we go all out to kill the bad guys and their enablers, rather than fighting decade long nation-building "wars" under the Care Bears Rules of Engagement, Paul's support would be a lot less.

Frankly I don't give a crap whether the Iraqis or Afghanis have elections, or schools, or running water, now or ever. And it's not worth one American death to see to it that they do.

30 posted on 12/16/2011 8:35:16 AM PST by Notary Sojac (Liberalism: Ideas so good, they have to be mandatory!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Ron Paul IS crazy....”Free bananas!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w2-n3U5Mm4


31 posted on 12/16/2011 8:38:02 AM PST by TheCause ("that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ron Paul is a racist, Nazi-ish, loony tune. I don’t want him, or any of his little friends, anywhere near the presidency. As I stated before, he’s just a cleaner Occupier.


32 posted on 12/16/2011 8:38:27 AM PST by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

How competent does one have to be to dismantle government?

Obama’s not exactly a genius and had no previous record of accomplishment, yet he’s managed to implement his policies pretty well, even when half the country is opposed.

It takes an engineer to design a machine, but any moron with a wrench can take it apart if he has the will.

The presidency has plenty of power to gut government with or without Congress. We only need someone who actually wants to do it.


33 posted on 12/16/2011 8:39:36 AM PST by chrisser (Starve the Monkeys!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
"They have long crossed the line from passion to obsession."

Yes, they have. I have a great niece who is foursquare in Ron Paul's corner. I have asked her questions concerning him while hoping to point many of these weaknesses/misunderstandings of our nation's policies. She simply brushes them aside and marches on. I don't wish to alienate her, so I usually just change the subject. Her mother and father disagree with her as well. It's frustrating to me when I encounter an otherwise intelligent person who simply does not respond to logic and reason.

34 posted on 12/16/2011 8:43:21 AM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
We're too far along to pretend that a few bandaids on the economy are going to turn it around. If it means 4 or 8 years of a little extra chaos in the world (and, honesly, can he do that much worse than Obama?) to get us patched up, that's a far better choice than chaos for the next 50 or 100 years because the U.S. ceases to exist as a world power.

That's it in a nutshell. Right now, the biggest threat to our nation is from within. If we cannot get our economy straightened out, the rest will be a moot--a disaster which will likely last for far longer than 4 years.

Securing the border just might be a good idea as well (how can you have 'National Security' if the nation, itself, isn't secure?

It can't be much worse than an interventionist policy which has delivered the arsenals of North African Dictatorships into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaida.

Sadly, he appears the only one who appears to want anything but more of the same ol' same ol' in DC.

35 posted on 12/16/2011 8:51:56 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jukeman
Ron Paul is not a conservative. As a matter of fact, I don’t know what he is.

He's a loony.

36 posted on 12/16/2011 8:56:42 AM PST by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ron Paul the guy who is a 9-11 truther....He is good on fiscal stuff but is so far left of Kucinich on foreign policy there is NO WAY I could vote for him (except if he is running against Barry)


37 posted on 12/16/2011 8:56:53 AM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
How competent does one have to be to dismantle government?

Unless Paul completely quacks out and ignores the Constitution (like he does with foreign policy issues), he would have to be very competent as the President doesn't have dictatorial powers. He will have to show leadership abilities to get Congress, who writes these laws, to go along with it.

Obama’s not exactly a genius and had no previous record of accomplishment, yet he’s managed to implement his policies pretty well, even when half the country is opposed.

If you want a leader who works like Obama has, then by all means, vote Paul.

It takes an engineer to design a machine, but any moron with a wrench can take it apart if he has the will.

There is a difference between dismantling and destroying. For example, it actually takes a highly competent engineer to dismantle a building without destroying its foundation and the buildings around it. You don't just get some dumb redneck to stick some dynamite in the bottom and hope it goes boom correctly.

The presidency has plenty of power to gut government with or without Congress.

Not if you follow the Constitution.

We only need someone who actually wants to do it.

Go back to my Fed example. I actually don't believe Paul wants to do it. He has been all talk, but when he is given a role where he can actually do something about the Fed, he hasn't done anything. He has the most power now he will ever have in regards to the Fed and he has been a failure. Like most old career politicians, he has an issue he likes to talk about and raise money on, but actually doesn't fix it lest he no longer can continue to raise money off it or get attention from it.

His history has shown he is nothing more than words, words, words.

If you are hiring an employee, you don't look to someone who just says "I talked about XYZ or I believe in ABC", you want someone with a demonstrable track record of success. Anyone can talk, few can do.

38 posted on 12/16/2011 8:57:59 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
I have asked her questions concerning him while hoping to point many of these weaknesses/misunderstandings of our nation's policies. She simply brushes them aside and marches on. I don't wish to alienate her, so I usually just change the subject. Her mother and father disagree with her as well. It's frustrating to me when I encounter an otherwise intelligent person who simply does not respond to logic and reason.

Sounds like the same mentality as Obama liberals
39 posted on 12/16/2011 9:07:22 AM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Sans-Culotte

LOL. Well, yeah. He is on the far side of loony.


40 posted on 12/16/2011 9:14:31 AM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
What I have not seen explained is how a rino is any better than a dem. Or, why it's worse to have a dem in office than a rino.

Neither party takes this country in a conservative direction. It seems to merely be a matter of marginally slower or faster.

I for one would like to see this discussed on the merits pro and con.

41 posted on 12/16/2011 9:16:13 AM PST by hfr (Liberalism is a moral disorder that leads to mental disorder (actually it's sin))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty

“I don’t like Ron Paul on foreign policy either. But as far as I’m concerned, at this particular juncture in history, the US Federal Government poses a far bigger threat to the safety and security of this country than Iran.”

Worth repeating


42 posted on 12/16/2011 9:18:43 AM PST by Bluestateredman (Self-sufficiency is the American Way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Ron Paul is a Libertarian that could not win as a Libertarian so he joined the GOP.

Exactly! He ran for POTUS several years ago and got nowhere so he went back to being a RINO.

I think he would risk the country to two more years of Obama to feed his ego

43 posted on 12/16/2011 9:25:55 AM PST by lonestar (It takes a village of idiots to elect a village idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty

Exactly right! Not one candidate other than Paul will make any effort to do that. Not one other candidate even seriously mentions the expansive role the Executive Branch has assumed. The Progressives have obviated Congress. We are ruled by power-hungry bureaucrats. Obama, Johnson, FDR, and Wilson have been the biggest offenders in leading us to this point, but plenty of Republicans have been just about as bad (Lincoln, TR, Nixon, the Bushes).

It astonishes me that the Tea Party supports Gingrich. The man is a megalomaniacal Progressive. How could anyone imagine Gingrich or Romney doing anything to roll back the damage Obama has done. If either of them is elected he will only tinker with Obamacare at the margins. The pace of the erosions of our liberties may slow, but it would march on nevertheless.

This country, as we know it, or think we know it, is about over. We need to ditch the income tax, the central bank, whack these bureaucracies, and enforce our borders. While we need to maintain a strong military, its role should be limited to defending our country and deterring any aggression against it. Part of that includes getting over the Israel fixation. We have been conned into thinking there’s a Biblical connection that compels us to dance to its tune.


44 posted on 12/16/2011 9:27:05 AM PST by rashley (Rashley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I am increasingly concerned that only a true anti-federal government radical is able to do enough to save America, and then, only if he gets strong enough support in congress.

While Paul’s biggest criticism is foreign policy, the truth of the matter is not the issues America has to deal with in its foreign policy, but the horribly bloated and ridiculous means we use to carry out our foreign policy.

For two glaring examples:

The US has our forces deployed in about 100 countries in the world!, we need to be in as few as a dozen. The rest are obscenely expensive waste.

Our shipbuilders seem incapable of building warships with any kind of budget or timetable. And there are very good, bad reasons they cannot do so.

In other words, the federal government needs to be slashed by more than 50% in size and scope, radically reduced to again be in constitutional authority and not running out of control. And the Department of Defense is part of the problem.

So the problem with our foreign policy is in the front end, not execution, and we should not be skunked by efforts to confuse the two.


45 posted on 12/16/2011 9:29:55 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Ron Paul's hatred of Israel and his antisemitism has driven him mad.
46 posted on 12/16/2011 9:30:35 AM PST by Armaggedon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

“He gives one or two really good ideas and then blows it on other topics.”

Yeah he blows it when he says he wants to:

Make securing our borders the top national security priority.

No amnesty.

Repeal ObamaCare

allow offshore drilling, abolish highway motor fuel taxes

Eliminate the capital gains, and death taxes

repeal the “Brady Bill” and the so-called “Assault Weapons Ban.”

Among other things but you’re right that’s some crazy liberal crap there.../s


47 posted on 12/16/2011 9:31:17 AM PST by CJ Wolf (OMG - Obama Must Go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Armaggedon

Ron Paul’s hatred of Israel and his antisemitism?

Please elaborate.


48 posted on 12/16/2011 9:35:57 AM PST by standing man (stand tall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

Yeah, I understand your situation. I have a niece who has completely written me off because I lambasted teacher unions in her presence. She said she works an extra two hours a day just to grade papers and such and if she did not have the union to look out for her rights the schrool board would run rough shod over her and other teachers. I axed her if she thought she was a superior teacher and she said of course. Yet she complained about the kids coming into her class who could not read or write. I then asked her how it felt knowing that inferior teachers were paid the same salary as she. She said she didn’t care about them. My response to her answer was that she evidently did not care about the kids being taught by those inferior teachers and unions are a big part of why there are inferior teachers and why their students are educationally abused and neglected. Things went off the rails after that and now my sister hates me for being mean to her daughter.
And my granddaughter hates me because I want our borders protected. She called me a racist and zenophobic. I told her she was a guest in my house and would be more respectful to her grandfather. Needless to say, we are not on good terms. Oh, well.


49 posted on 12/16/2011 9:46:16 AM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: CJ Wolf

As I said - he has several good ideas but all-in-all he’s one scary guy. I do not want him as president.


50 posted on 12/16/2011 9:47:01 AM PST by SkyDancer ("If You Want To Learn To Love Better, You Should Start With A Friend Who You Hate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson