Really says something.

MadisonConservative on May 21, 2009 at 9:33 AM

As in, your post really says that you didn’t actually read that which you criticize, i.e., the following text: “I am not one [a Ron Paul voter] myself . . . .”

We can only hope. If not you can basically look at my multiple posts about Christianity and that should suffice.

LevStrauss on May 21, 2009 at 12:37 PM

I guess I could say the main difference between my view and his is that in Age of Reason he seems to be hung up on this prophet-poet comparison. He went on and on trying to say that the word prophet is basically synonomous to the word poet. Ahh its all Greek to me.

My quibble this time is with his insistence that formal declarations of war in Afghanistan and Iraq might have made a difference to soldiers stationed overseas insofar as they ensured those troops went to battle with “the full support of we, the people.” Would they have? If so, how? The Authorization of Military Force in Afghanistan drew exactly one no vote, which is more than enough to pass a war declaration. Does anyone here think war, formally declared by the U.S. Congress, would have deterred any of the nutroots shrieking or protests we’ve seen over the years?

It could have gotten a lot more scrutiny by Congress previous to voting for an official declaration, the Dems who voted for it could not use that weasly “but make sure you go to the UN” bs, that’s for sure. It would have taken a lot of the wiggle room out of Congress. Maybe we would have uncovered the disingenous marketing plan before it has cost us over a trillion, not to mention future repair costs, the opportunity cost of diverting resources elsewhere, and the health care costs of all the injured troops. Also thousands of dead soldiers that did not need to be.

Will “Thomas Paine” be giving us his view of Christianity? LOL

ddrintn on May 20, 2009 at 9:49 PM

We can only hope. If not you can basically look at my multiple posts about Christianity and that should suffice.

I hope viewers really listened carefully to the words. The “Declaration of War” was a minor issue of the speech. The major point was that We are U.S. If We do not take back control from the politicians we elected, we will no longer be united, but derided by them until they have denuded U.S. so we cannot regain control over our lives.

MSGTAS on May 21, 2009 at 9:41 AM

Agreed, except for the war declaration everything else makes sense, especially telling our apologist-in-chief to stop and desist.

False dilemma and I would LOVE how you try to convince us to go for Ike II because “this time, it will SOOO work!”

How the HELL is Paul going to get his foreign chops cleaned up when he hangs out with idiots like Alex Jones and his ilk?

And if he cannot, why should we BOTHER voting for him over Obama, given their shared idioticy on foreign policy and history?

I await your response.

webprose:

1. The constant criticism of “Paul voters” around here seems to be a bit disingenuous. Most Paul voters support the exact same conservative values and the majority of the members here. The minority of the Paul-nuts fit into the horribly narrow stereotype that has been used to dismiss the great ideas of the rest. Additionally, as the government continues to meddle in the economy, Paul’s statements in regards to the government screwing things up the more they’re involved are proving to be pretty prescient.

So tell me, if only a small and irritating minority fits into that stereotype you mention, why are you voting for an isolationist, historically-challenged Anti-War candidate with ties to white supremacism and 9/11 trutherism in the first place?

And while he MAY be decent in domestic issues, how does his absolute failure to hold up in regards to foreign policy (perhaps even MORE important than domestic) get negated by that?

1. The constant criticism of “Paul voters” around here seems to be a bit disingenuous. Most Paul voters support the exact same conservative values and the majority of the members here. The minority of the Paul-nuts fit into the horribly narrow stereotype that has been used to dismiss the great ideas of the rest. Additionally, as the government continues to meddle in the economy, Paul’s statements in regards to the government screwing things up the more they’re involved are proving to be pretty prescient.

So tell me, if only a small and irritating minority fits into that stereotype you mention, why are you voting for an isolationist, historically-challenged Anti-War candidate with ties to white supremacism and 9/11 trutherism in the first place?

And while he MAY be decent in domestic issues, how does his absolute failure to hold up in regards to foreign policy (perhaps even MORE important than domestic) get negated by that?

OneVision on May 20, 2009 at 11:26 PM

The starry-eyed devotion to Ron Paul by some of his supporters is damn near identical to the devotion paid to Obama.

Really says something.

2. This guy is spot on. If you disagree with him on anything here (other than the declaration of war piece), you shouldn’t dare call yourself a conservative.

Who knows, it’s not like ‘reason’ has played a significant part in the behavior of the nutroots left; I continually ‘fail’ when I try to project what life would be like if they acted reasonably and logically.

Don’t blame me; you love him

Admit it, Allah, so do you, deep down.