Republicans throw up a rival for Sarah Palin (CPAC/GayPAC's Ron Paul)

The Australian ^ | February 22, 2010 | Brad Norington, Washington correspondent

[ChrisInAR]

I don’t care for the Mitt-bashing either, but it pales in comparison to the Paul-bashing...but that’s OK, everyone has the right to speak their mind.

I myself don’t know a whole lot about Mitt’s opinions, but I doubt of he would be nearly be as consistent in upholding his Constotutional Oath of Office that Rep. Paul would be & has been over the years.

I think Mitt’s a good guy, I guess most women would consider him to be a hunk, & he’s got a great voice, IMO.

[Caipirabob]

"ButtPAC isn't "conservative" anything.

They've lost all credibility in my eyes.

[Swing_Thought]

Maybe in another 10 years or so the GOP can return to its limited government / America first views.

I was under the impression that FR stood for these values too. Judging by the hysteria, evidently not.

[ChrisInAR]

You’re absolutely right about your WAR comment, but the questions that are not being asked or discussed include:

Why aren’t we using our military as a DEFENSIVE weapon rather than an offensive one before the war begins...rather than using our military might to “spread democracy” across the globe?

Why don’t we seal our borders & return to the non-interventionist foreign policies that were used by the Founding Fathers — & then once getting involved in a war, KILL THE ENEMY, & take no prisoners?

[CyberAnt]

Well .. I have to challenge your statement.

One of the main things the President’s oath says is that he will defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic, which is his primary responsibility as President.

Since Ron does not believe in going to war .. then he does not keep that oath already (since he’s not willing to defend us against all enemies) .. and I would not, therefore, ever vote for him.

I’m not bashing Ron - he’s entitled to his opinion, but he’s wrong about WAR.

[ChrisInAR]

Thank you...it’s nice hearing a positive comment & not having to deal w/ the anger & bitterness that have poisoned the hearts of the PaulHaters once in a blue moon. :-)

[ChrisInAR]

Since Ron does not believe in going to war...

That statement is absolutely false. If it was true, what would be the point of even having a Department of Defense? Even President Reagan praised Rep. Paul for his views on the military. Rep. Paul had a respectable career as a flight surgeon in the US Aif Force, too.

[CyberAnt]

Because DEMOCRACY - once established - keeps the enemy from having a hiding place from which to attack us.

It works like this. When a country has a leader hell bent on killing your citizens - and attacks them all over the world .. isn’t it better to get rid of that leader and help the citizens of his country have a better life .. and you gain an ally instead of an enemy ..??

If your only goal is DEFENSE .. you’re going to be sitting around waiting for the enemy to attack you .. I don’t think that’s a very good plan.

I agree with sealing the borders .. because as it is now, the terrorists are taking full advantage of the fact that they are so fluid.

However, it’s unrealistic to believe we can live in America and seal ourselves in and have no foreign relations at all .. that just totally will not and should not happen. We live on the same globe .. and we need to have allies and friends around the world. WWII could not have been won without the allies and friends around the world who helped.

To say that we could have a policy of “us four and no more” is totally irresponsible. That means we would have let Hitler ravage the world and we would not have lifted a finger ..?? We would have let Saddam continue to kill our soldiers all over the world by blowing them up .. and we would not lift a finger to stop it.

Do you really think that would have been a good plan ..??

[pupdog]

I was under the impression that FR stood for these values too. Judging by the hysteria, evidently not.

I stopped posting on here years ago when it became BushBot central. Every now and then something makes me poke my head back in to see if this place has become any saner.

Ron Paul is as clear a litmus test on limited government as we'll get in our lifetime. He has a pro-freedom resume as long as the entire rest of the GOP field put together. "Not conservative"? Heh, yeah. Hey, tell me, who did you guys nominate in 2008 again?

I'm quite happy to watch from the sidelines and wait for the GOP to admit that Paul is right. And if they don't... I'll find my freedom with or without them. I would just prefer with.

[ChrisInAR]

It goes like this:

Our nation is a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. The latter is not a stable for of government. When you read the Constitution, you will also find out that one the responsibilities of the fedgov is to ensure that the States have a republican form of government, not a democratic one (& I'm not referring to political parties, either). The Founding Fathers opposed democracy, & James Madison criticized it in paper #5 of The Federalist Papers. On the other hand, if you read The Communist Manifesto, you will read that an important goal of Karl Marx was to make the world "safe for democracy".

Where did you get that silly idea that I would like to "...seal ourselves in and have no foreign relations at all"? ROTFLMAO! Read paper #45 of The Federalist Papers & you will learn that our relations w/ foreign governments are among the 1st & foremost responsibilities of the fedgov, for cryin' out loud! What was that Thomas Jefferson phrase, I don't remember it exactly: "friendship & trade w/ ALL nations, entangling alliances w/ NONE"?

[Destroyer Sailor]

Some people have to work and cannot hang out at such nonsense as CPAC. But they vote and in greater numbers than the nuts who gave Ron Paul his 31%. Palin can draw more people to an event than Ron Paul could ever dream of. If and when Palin runs for president you will be amazed by her ground game and support.

[CyberAnt]

I wasn’t saying “you” wanted that .. I’m saying that’s what Ron Paul wants and that’s why I can’t ever vote for him.

[ChrisInAR]

I wasn’t saying “you” wanted that .. I’m saying that’s what Ron Paul wants and that’s why I can’t ever vote for him.

I know that...actually, what I said goes for both me & Dr./Rep. Paul. He has no desire to turn the US into the Western version of North Korea. I would think it's safe to say that he is the most pro-free trade Member of Congress. Please don't touch the "isolationism" Kool-Aid that the PaulHaters try to serve you, 'cuz it ain't true.

[CyberAnt]

When you refuse to leave your country to defend friends or allies .. you are an isolationist. When you believe there is NO REASON to go to war .. you are an isolationist.

Free trade has nothing whatsoever to do with it. You can trade all you want but that doesn’t mean that you have to leave your country to do it.

Please don’t try to ply your Ron Paul stuff on me .. I ain’t buyin’.

[ChrisInAR]

Europe & Japan have the $ to defend themselves. It’s not the business of the US taxpayer to provide for their defense. Besides, I just read a story yesterday (or the day before) where folks in Germany are getting upset about having US nuclear missles on their soil.

[CyberAnt]

Yes, I’m sure the Euros think they have a yellow belly in the office of the president, and they will be able to bully him into removing our missiles from Europe.

And .. if that doesn’t work .. surely a person like Ron Paul, who would not fight to defend us, surely he would also be a great candidate to use to achieve their goal of removing our missiles.

So now, we have left Europe totally bare .. perfect for the takeover by Russia and/or any other nation. Geeeeee .. what a great country we are! And .. the taxpayer didn’t have to pay to defend them.

[ChrisInAR]

Yes, I’m sure the Euros think they have a yellow belly in the office of the president, and they will be able to bully him into removing our missiles from Europe.

What right do we have to force the nations of Europe to keep our missles on their soil? Aren't they sovereign nations that can make their own decidions?

...a person like Ron Paul, who would not fight to defend us...

PLEASE -- put the Neocon-flavored Kool Aid dowm. Are you not aware that President RONALD REAGAN praised Rep. Paul for his commitment to defending the US? Rep. Paul knows good & well that national defense is one of the main responsibilities of the fedgov:

RONALD REAGAN ON RON PAUL:

- - "Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense.

- - "We need to keep him fighting for our country."

[greeneyes]

What is not being reported is that another poll showed that there was a lack of conviction about the candidates ie those voting were not enthusiastic about the choices.

This combined with the fact that the majority of the attendees did not vote, means it is a wide open race. The last nationwide poll I saw showed Palin leading the pack and Romney as 2cnd.FWIW

[Mozilla]

Nobody took seriously Palin or Bachmann, at least, or even Jim DeMint in that poll so this a joke. Not the people the Tea Party Movement want or like.