Posted on 09/08/2011 2:15:39 PM PDT by RobinMasters
There is one line the GOP presidential candidates often repeat during their debates, and it goes like this: Anyone on this stage would be a better president than the current occupant of the Oval Office. That sounds good, except it isn’t actually true. And the reason is because a fellow by the name of Ron Paul is among those on the stage.
No one who has read what I’ve written about Barack Obama during the last two-and-three-quarter years can come away with anything except the impression that I’m a strong, and at times even a fierce, critic of his. But whatever my disagreements with Obama, even he is preferable to Ron Paul. The first duty of a president, after all, is commander-in-chief. It is in the area of foreign policy and national security that he exercises disproportionate influence. And it is in that arena where Ron Paul is particularly reckless, particularly irresponsible, and (if he were ever to possess any real power and influence) particularly dangerous.
There is plenty of room for differences within conservatism. But Ron Paul’s views, on the substance, are indefensible, at least for a conservative.
Barack Obama is a terrible president. But Ron Paul would be worse.
How about none of the above.
No matter how many times he says the word Constitution, it doesn't make Paul a 'respecter of the Constitution'. Paul treats the Constitution the same way Fred Phelps treats the Bible.
Ron Paul has a big problem that I’m surprised nobody else has mentioned, because the voters may pay more attention to it than to his opinions. He is expired.
First, I believe right now that Paul is 75 years old, so if he is elected president, when his term begins he will be as old as Ronald Reagan was when he left office. Anybody else remember all the people who were concerned that Reagan might be too old for the job?
Second, he has been in Congress since 1978. That means he has been part of the problem far longer than he has been part of the solution. I checked back as far as 1900, and since then, Lyndon Johnson was the only president who got elected after spending more than 14 years in Congress. And Johnson was probably a special case, due to JFK’s assassination. When somebody has been on Capitol Hill too long, people get tired of them and wish for a fresh face; I’m sure that’s one of the reasons why John Kerry and John McCain didn’t win their White House runs. And as far as I’m concerned, anybody who has been in Congress for more than half as long as I’ve been alive, can’t be all good.
Now Rand Paul, Ron Paul’s son, is a different matter. He has done a good job representing us in Kentucky so far, and I voted for him last year, so I would seriously consider voting for him if he runs for president. To any “Paulestinians” reading this, consider backing the younger Paul instead.
Anyone on that stage last night would be light years better than Zero.
“In Ron Paul, you’d have a guy oblivious to the clear and present dangers presented by radical Islam....”
.
You are right about RP, but can you think of any prominnent American politician who truly understands the dangers that Islam poses? Do you see any politician without kneepads when dealing with Islam?
We have no Geert Wilders.
Ron Paul is a libertarian.
Ron Paul is a kook, but he is not a marxist muslim.
Neither would be good, but Paul wouldn’t be bowing to the practitioners of sharia.
I believe he’s actually 76.
>>>...but can you think of any prominnent American politician who truly understands the dangers that Islam poses?
Not off the top of my head - but I think most are at least open to the concept of radical Islam being a clear and present danger to the country, where RP is willfully ignorant, and closed to the idea at all.
I’m happy for you. Rest well.
Ron Paul is easily a much better choice.
Where Ron Paul is wrong is in harmless ways.
He wants to legalize things that wont get legalized.
Perhaps his most harmful views for our economy are wrt the Federal Reserve. If it was abolished, it would be like the Jacksonian depression. OTOH, undermining the Fed and its bubblenomics is not a bad thing.
Why not get our over-active GOvernment to do less - much less. Lower spending, taxes, regulations, overseas commitments, etc. Ron Paul’s inaction would be a blessing ... for a while.
Obama OTOH has been dangerous in so many ways, turning our government against us, we the people.
No contest. Ron Paul would be better.
“Not off the top of my head - ...”
.
Wow, we are in deep sh*t aren’t we? And the sad thing is that I don’t even see one on the horizon. Not Perry, not Bachman, not Mitt. It’s only Newt who has more than just an inkling.
I have followed the debates and they can talk all they want about turning the economy around, but if they don’t do anything about the spread of Islam in this country we’re still going to end up just another turd world country.
Ron Paul is a fruitcake... He shouldn’t even be in the debate, he is NOT a Republican NOR Conservative.. he is a Libertarian; and I assume you are too, since you follow him.
Most weedheads are but they don't know it.
Lol, good point ;)
It would be like Johnson against Goldwater (or on the other side, like Nixon against McGovern). You may not want to see "your guy" in office, but you don't want to see the party routed.
The real story here: if you take Ron Paul and whoever Commentary wants and split their positions right down the middle, you'd have a pretty good platform.
Find a candidate who avoids the fringe positions of each, and you might have a good pick.
I don,t know if Ron Paul,s forgien policy would work or not but at least he would try to run this country with the constitution of the united states in mind and it most likely would not be a police state, and it is beginning to look like a police state, yes i would vote for him over Obama and maybe over some of the others.
The military-industrial complex (which is well represented here at FR) seems to be terrified of Ron Paul. I guess they are afraid he would take away their toys and free money.
As James Carvell so aptly put it almost 20 years ago: “It’s the economy, Stupid!”
We are headed for an economic catastrophe. The only person on that stage last night who truly understands why, who truly has a solution, and who would truly try to implement a solution if he were elected President is Ron Paul.
The true enemies of the American people over the last 60 years have been the boneheaded Republican and Democratic Presidents and legislators who have let our economy reach its current state.
Nothing else really matters but the economy in the end. What’s happening half way around the world in an Islamic country doesn’t matter to a father in Ohio who can’t put food on the table.
If Obama is reelected or if Perry, Romney, Gingrich, et al are elected, the economy will continue to implode because none of them understand the seriousness of our economic problems and none of them know how to fix the economic problems. They are all just spewing crap that their focus groups have told them will make them sound like they have a clue.
Over the last 60 years, government has grown in size and power to the point where it’s has a stranglehold on our economy. But over those 60 years, Republicans have occupied the White House 60% of the time. Why would any sane person now think that our economic problems will be solved by putting another run-of-the-mill career GOP politician in the White House.
The fact is that Ron Paul is the only person on the stage last night who would give us a chance of creating a better future for our children if he became President. All the others will just be more of the same.
Some of you who come here to criticize Paul are obviously paid in some way to do so. Nothing anyone says will stop your ignorant posts.
Others who have criticized Paul should take the time to read “End the Fed”. Then, tell me which of the other boneheads on the stage last night could have written that book?
As I looked into the eyes of Perry, Romney, et all last night, I could see that the only reason they were on that stage was for self-aggrandizement and power. For them, becoming President is just the fulfillment of an empty goal.
As I listened to Ron Paul, I saw a man who was there because he wants to truly help America find a way out of the morass to which we have been led by the GOP and Rat career politicians. He’s the only person on that stage last night who was worth believing.
So many voters are so fed up with what has gone on under both Zero and W., that they will vote “none of the above,” in backing Ron Paul. I think Paul is a patriot, and much too honest for the hypocrisy and political correctness that runs rampant. Zero, on the other hand, has proven to be outrageously dishonest. I agree with another poster, that both the bankers and neocons must fear Ron, as their minions seem to be posting all over, trying desperately to hurt him..even on the beloved freerepublic.
He isn’t a conservative. He’s a libertarian. And an idiot to boot.
But it is just like any other party they do not agree on everything, i think Ron Paul is right about getting involved with and trying to run the rest of the world, War is one thing but we are the ones responsible for all of the oil wells in the muslem countries that are now being used to blackmail us, we are in the UN and they are telling us what to do.
Fence and machine guns on the border?if we want to keep the aliens out, stop the socialist welfare crap, then if the Americans are too lazy to pick the fruit let them go hungry and let the mexicans come up and pick it but keep them off of welfare.
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.