And this year’s CPAC straw poll winner is … Update: YAF expels Paul from board

posted at 6:00 pm on February 12, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Alternate headline: CPAC straw poll plumbs depths of irrelevance yet again.  How meaningless was the straw poll for preferred GOP presidential nominee?  The bronze-medal winner is Gary Johnson, the libertarian former governor of New Mexico.  That means that the libertarian vote actually got split this year, and wound up taking two out of three spots on the straw poll anyway:

For the second year in a row, Ron Paul won the presidential straw poll at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, earning 30 percent of the vote.

The Texas congressman, known for his libertarian views, ran for president in 2008 but was never a serious contender for the GOP nomination.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a 2008 GOP candidate who is expected to run again, came in second place with 23 percent of the vote. Romney won the previous three presidential straw polls before Paul snapped his streak last year. …

Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie came in a distant third with 6 percent of the vote, followed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich with 5 percent.

Considering the environment, Romney has to feel pretty good about gaining the silver medal.  After Christie, who’s not running, and Gingrich, who may be, the order of the poll results were:

  • Tim Pawlenty – 4%
  • Michele Bachmann – 4%
  • Mitch Daniels – 4%
  • Sarah Palin – 3%
  • Herman Cain – 2%

Of the five, only Palin didn’t appear at CPAC this year.  Finishing below them were two prominent potential candidates, Rick Santorum and Haly Barbour, who did and finished with 2% and 1% respectively for their efforts. When combining first and second choices, the onlychange in the order is that Bachmann and Pawlenty trade places.

In other straw poll results, a slim majority of straw poll respondents believe that Republican control of Congress will rein in federal spending (51%) and reduce government regulation (50%).  A plurality of 47% believe that the GOP can get Congress to cut federal taxes.  CPAC’s voters are more pessimistic about repealing ObamaCare and paying down the national debt, with a plurality of 40% on each question believing that Congress won’t accomplish either task.

Of course, when Ron Paul and Gary Johnson team up on the dream CPAC ticket, maybe they’ll get a little more optimistic ….

Update: Warner Todd Huston has more.

Update II, 2/13/11: Young Americans for Freedom (not to be confused with Young America’s Foundation) has expelled Ron Paul from their board over his positions on the war and his refusal to distance himself from 9/11 Truthers:

YAF’s concern with Rep. Paul stems from his delusional and disturbing alliance with the fringe Anti-War movement.

“It is a sad day in American history when a one-time conservative-libertarian stalwart has fallen more out of touch with America’s needs for national security than the current feeble and appeasing administration,” said YAF’s Senior National Director Jordan Marks.

Paul, who had served on the YAF Advisory Board for more than two decades, was awarded with YAF’s highest honor, the Guardian of Freedom award, an honor Rep. Paul has touted on his biography for many years. Only a decade ago, Dr. Paul praised YAF’s work on the House floor. Paul called YAF’s founding document, the Sharon Statement “a great document explicating the philosophy of freedom.”

Marks doesn’t pull any punches in his statement, either:

“Rep. Paul’s refusal to support our nation’s military and national security interests border on treason, aside from his failure to uphold his oath to the United States Constitution and defend our country and citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Marks continued.

“Rep. Paul has strayed to the left of Obama and allied himself with the radical anti-war left by laying the blame on America for the unprovoked attacks of Sept. 11th. Additionally, Rep. Paul has not condemned the 9/11 “Truther” conspiracy theorists that support him, and he has repeatedly insisted, that the United States not bring justice to those who have murdered thousands of our civilians and soldiers at home and abroad. This is simply unacceptable. Clearly Rep. Paul cares more about a doomed presidential run than he does our country,” Marks added.

I didn’t add this to the post yesterday because I didn’t think it amounted to much, except for a chance to beat up Ron Paul a bit.  Commenters have noted the expulsion on other threads, however, and since this post will ride on top for a while, it seemed like a good place to note the expulsion.  It certainly qualifies as a stinging rebuke.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7

Oh wait…a little problem with that second statement. *cough*

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Dammit, are we agreeing again?

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Well, let’s see the embassy bombing, the USS Cole, the first attack on the WTC, 9/11 is why we responded.

G M on February 13, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 1:52 PM

I don’t disagree with you on this, really.

The problem is that many Paul supporters and Paul himself perpetuate the zombie menace by constantly re-infecting themselves with pink-eye thinking their somehow dealing with the larger problem.

To me, to be intellectually honest and ideological consistent, its all or nothing, especially when it comes to federal money. Since spending is so out of control – NO ONE has any business taking anything we can’t afford.

NO ONE.

If you are, you’re simply gaming the system.

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 2:01 PM

Dammit, are we agreeing again?

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 1:59 PM

If we are, you’re still a homo, homo.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 2:03 PM

G M on February 13, 2011 at 1:54 PM

ZOMG! Teh Muslims with teh Sharia Lawz! Be afraid! Be very afraid!

As you may or may not be aware, the wars so many “conservatives” have supported over the last decade have built two Islamic states with Constitutions based on Sharia law, so…

Rae on February 13, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Ron Paul has slopped up over 31 Billion dollars in pork. And one of the dark dirty secrets that Ronbots don’t want to talk about, because of “baseline budgeting”, every dollar he took from the taxpayers, is added to the next budget – in perpetuity. So his skimming of that 31 Billion has increased the deficit by over 100 Billion: and counting.

That’s not a trivial amount – most “spend and tax” democrats haven’t managed to cheat the taxpayers of even half that amount. When your “fiscal conservative’s” record would make even the most hard core redistributions blush, you might have put your faith in the wrong man.

Moreover, if you look at his fellow Texas reps, Michael McCaul(TX-10) and Jeb Hensarling (TX-5), they don’t request earmarks at all. They are the real fiscal conservatives, not the conman Ron Paul.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Well, let’s see the embassy bombing, the USS Cole, the first attack on the WTC, 9/11 is why we responded.

G M on February 13, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Naw, see, because we built military bases on Muslim holy grounds and because we’re an empire forcing our culture on others and the neoconservatives are warmongers and the Joooos control everything and blah blah blah blah blah…we had it coming. Ron Paul 2012!

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 2:05 PM

G M on February 13, 2011 at 1:54 PM

ZOMG! Teh Muslims with teh Sharia Lawz! Be afraid! Be very afraid!

As you may or may not be aware, the wars so many “conservatives” have supported over the last decade have built two Islamic states with Constitutions based on Sharia law, so…

Rae on February 13, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Well, governments based on zen buddhism probably wouldn’t have flown there, would they? So, what’s the proper Ronulan response to 9/11?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Oh yeah, the nation-building in Japan and Germany was like a total failure, right?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 1:58 PM

We’re still there, 65 years later, ain’t we?

Is that the definition of “success?”

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:13 PM

It certainly qualifies as a stinging rebuke.

It certainly does. Of both Paul and the YAF. If this guy is so bad why was he ever a member of the advisory board to begin with? The tone of this release is ridiculous. When you are throwing out the trash you don’t carry it out to the curb, rib the bags open and start spreading the garbage around.

Rocks on February 13, 2011 at 2:15 PM

When you are throwing out the trash you don’t carry it out to the curb, rib the bags open and start spreading the garbage around.

Rocks on February 13, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Your neighbors must love you.

katy the mean old lady on February 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Um wasn’t Ryan Sorba of YAF the one who was so obnoxious to GOProud’s reps last year at CPAC? YAF doesn’t seem to represent conservative libertarians anymore; certainly doubt Goldwater/Buckley would have approved of Sorba’s behavior.

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Oh yeah, the nation-building in Japan and Germany was like a total failure, right?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 1:58 PM

We’re still there, 65 years later, ain’t we?

Is that the definition of “success?”

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Pretty much, yeah.

trigon on February 13, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Ron Paul has slopped up over 31 Billion dollars in pork. And one of the dark dirty secrets that Ronbots don’t want to talk about, because of “baseline budgeting”, every dollar he took from the taxpayers, is added to the next budget – in perpetuity. So his skimming of that 31 Billion has increased the deficit by over 100 Billion: and counting.

That’s not a trivial amount – most “spend and tax” democrats haven’t managed to cheat the taxpayers of even half that amount. When your “fiscal conservative’s” record would make even the most hard core redistributions blush, you might have put your faith in the wrong man.

Moreover, if you look at his fellow Texas reps, Michael McCaul(TX-10) and Jeb Hensarling (TX-5), they don’t request earmarks at all. They are the real fiscal conservatives, not the conman Ron Paul.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 2:05 PM

I don’t disagree with you on this, really.

The problem is that many Paul supporters and Paul himself perpetuate the zombie menace by constantly re-infecting themselves with pink-eye thinking their somehow dealing with the larger problem.

To me, to be intellectually honest and ideological consistent, its all or nothing, especially when it comes to federal money. Since spending is so out of control – NO ONE has any business taking anything we can’t afford.

NO ONE.

If you are, you’re simply gaming the system.

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 2:01 PM

I don’t disagree it’s a problem, but I’m saying we have bigger problems.

The earmarked money is already spent money. This is fact. If Paul did like those who request none, and took none, more ends up elsewhere, and we’re still footing the bill. Add in the fact we don’t know if his constituents are net contributors or drains on the spending, and we don’t have enough information to really worry about it at this time. If they pay in more than comes back, they’re not ripping us off. If they get more than they send, they’re a drain.

I’m far more concerned with the “zombies” than I am the “pink eye.” Not that the “pink eye” isn’t a problem, but we’ve got bigger problems.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Rocks on February 13, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Did you read their statement as to why? It was well reasoned and to the point. We want young conservatives like that.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Well, governments based on zen buddhism probably wouldn’t have flown there, would they? So, what’s the proper Ronulan response to 9/11?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 2:09 PM

I believe that Paul did vote to authorize responding to Al-qaeda, didn’t he? Guess that would be the “proper Ronulan response.”

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:20 PM

One might wonder, if 100 Billion dollars isn’t a “big enough” problem, what figure would be?

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Did you read their statement as to why? It was well reasoned and to the point. We want young conservatives like that.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:22 PM

I did and I don’t disagree with them. My point is they act like this is something new or some event happened. Why was he ever on their advisory board to begin with? And why wasn’t he “expelled” years ago?

Rocks on February 13, 2011 at 2:26 PM

I like Ron Paul’s economics, his view on the role of government, and his position on US foreign policy. When it comes to his trutherism, that’s when it gets weird. It irks me when people call him an isolationist. He’s not an isolationist, he’s a noninterventionist – there’s a big difference between the two and I agree with him. We think it’s okay for the US to go around the world and install dictators in other countries and tell other people how to live. If China or Canada or any other country were doing that to us, we wouldn’t stand for it, but since it’s the US and we’re on the “moral high ground,” it’s okay for us to do it, but not others.

Moreover, people like to bring up the WTC, USS Cole, etc. Think for a second why they’re doing that in the first place: it’s because we’ve been in the Middle East since WWII and we’ve been telling them how to live. After a while, that’s going to create a lot of hate and anger. Instead of running around policing the world and forcing countries/people how to live like we do, let’s set a good example by trading and living freely and respecting others. The sooner people figure that out, the sooner we’ll be out of that mess.

Now excuse me while I prepare for an onslaught of comments directed at me for agreeing with someone who can get us out of this mess. Think of our foreign policy this way: What if I came to your house and rearranged everything in it and told you how to live. How would you feel?

Sleeper on February 13, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Paul smeared Conservatives, and again not at all understanding freedom or the constitution, during the Ground Zero Mosque debate. Writing a long winded response calling Conservatives Islamophobes among other things and advocating for the Mosque to be built.

It would not at all surprise me to find out Paul, like Grover Norquist, and the rest of Lew Rockwell’ cult, are in bed with Islamist.

jp on February 13, 2011 at 2:26 PM

So, what’s the proper Ronulan response to 9/11?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 2:09 PM

RP voted for the Afghanistan war. He also attempted to get a Letter of Marque and Reprisal through CONgress.

What has our Wilsonian nation-building misadventures gotten us but two Islamic states, deeper in debt, scores of dead and tragically injured soldiers, and more blowback?

Prevention is a worth of pound of cure.

A functioning national defense and USCIS would have helped.

Alas, I guess the fedgov is just too busy running every industry (into the ground) than to actually attend to one or two of its few Constitutionally mandated duties.

“Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.”
–Thomas Jefferson

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”
–George Washington

“A republic, if you can keep it.”
–Benjamin Franklin

Sorry, Ben! No can do.

Rae on February 13, 2011 at 2:28 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/11/cpac-brackets-electable-gop-presidential-candidates/#content

^ most recent poll results. Gov. Palin leads all as of Sunday 13 Feb

long_cat on February 13, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Rocks on February 13, 2011 at 2:26 PM

I’m tracking now.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 2:19 PM

It was opinion and not behavior.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:31 PM

I like Ron Paul’s economics, his view on the role of government, and his position on US foreign policy. When it comes to his trutherism, that’s when it gets weird. It irks me when people call him an isolationist. He’s not an isolationist, he’s a noninterventionist – there’s a big difference between the two and I agree with him. We think it’s okay for the US to go around the world and install dictators in other countries and tell other people how to live. If China or Canada or any other country were doing that to us, we wouldn’t stand for it, but since it’s the US and we’re on the “moral high ground,” it’s okay for us to do it, but not others.

Moreover, people like to bring up the WTC, USS Cole, etc. Think for a second why they’re doing that in the first place: it’s because we’ve been in the Middle East since WWII and we’ve been telling them how to live. After a while, that’s going to create a lot of hate and anger. Instead of running around policing the world and forcing countries/people how to live like we do, let’s set a good example by trading and living freely and respecting others. The sooner people figure that out, the sooner we’ll be out of that mess.

Now excuse me while I prepare for an onslaught of comments directed at me for agreeing with someone who can get us out of this mess. Think of our foreign policy this way: What if I came to your house and rearranged everything in it and told you how to live. How would you feel?

Sleeper on February 13, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Actions have consequences. Which is what Paul has been saying.

We would despise it if our enemies did it to us, or if we had third parties giving money and selling arms to enemies in our region. We would have every right to be pissed off. Can’t tell some people this though. Reminding them that our meddling has in fact causes problems means we just “hate America” or “hate our military.” \sarcasm

Paul smeared Conservatives, and again not at all understanding freedom or the constitution, during the Ground Zero Mosque debate. Writing a long winded response calling Conservatives Islamophobes among other things and advocating for the Mosque to be built.

It would not at all surprise me to find out Paul, like Grover Norquist, and the rest of Lew Rockwell’ cult, are in bed with Islamist.

I’m sorry. I guess I missed that part of the Constitution that says that we are allowed to tell Muslims where and how they can worship, and where they can build their houses of worship on property they own. Where’s that located again?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:33 PM

I fortunately had the opportunity to go to CPAC after wanting to go for the past 20 years. I have never felt so embarrassed with fellow “Conservatives” as to when they shouted down most every speaker. We were there when Cheney presented an award to Rumsfeld & the Ronulans were screaming like hyenas. My friends and I all stood up and at the same time, not planned, screamed for them to shut the (insert expletive here) up (we said it loud enough that Cheney heard us and he was smiling & chuckling). The crowd heard us and broke out in a USA chant all four times.

The most mortifiying thing was the horrible straw poll results that went so long that Allen West was late getting on and when the results were announced they got up all red faced and screaming, celebrating like Palestinians on 9/11. It was just digusting. Then they all got up and left at the same time before Allen West spoke. CPAC needs to disqualify the ballots that have Ron Paul listed as a first choice and a second choice as those ballots are no better than ACORN.

margategop517 on February 13, 2011 at 2:41 PM

aside from his failure to uphold his oath to the United States Constitution and defend our country and citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic,”

I would say this is also a huge problem for the left.
Ron Paul had my attention several years ago on some things.
But when I heard his ideas on foreign policy, that was IT.
Based on those ideas alone he is insane.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Pretty easy to see how Obama won key caucuses early on…the difference between him and Ron Paul is that Obama was actually elected.

Maybe Ron Paul supporters should establish residency in Iowa ASAP?

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 13, 2011 at 2:43 PM

This is all very compelling debate, but the facts remain that there is no more polarizing Conservative politician than Ron Paul. I can appreciate his followers wanting the no-nonsense governance he seems to profess. The fact is he doesn’t deliver on even that considering his taste for earmarks himself. But the thing that will ensure he never gets my vote is his foreign policy beliefs. His opinions as to the war, our military and our history of world involvement sounds exactly like what you might expect from the pages of our enemies history books.

Ron Paul will never be the President of The United States.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:44 PM

I’m sorry. I guess I missed that part of the Constitution that says that we are allowed to tell Muslims where and how they can worship, and where they can build their houses of worship on property they own. Where’s that located again?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:33 PM

It’s right there next to the “no Christmas displays,and right under the ban on diplaying the ten commandments.
No one has said theycan’t.They shouldn’t.

katy the mean old lady on February 13, 2011 at 2:45 PM

thphilli on February 12, 2011 at 6:30 PM

He could do a lot of good.
But bcs he is insane concerning the protection of this country from her outside enemies, he would only do more harm than good.
I can take a candidate with flaws.
But this is a suicidal flaw & Paul is a class A MORON based on it alone.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 2:45 PM

margategop517 on February 13, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Thanks for sharing that.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:46 PM

So, Ron Paul was for invading A-stan, before he was against it? What of the “blowback”?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 2:47 PM

If Ron Paul was the President today instead of Barak Obama, he would have also missed the 3 AM phone call about the Middle East just as President Obama has done.

Ron Paul was the only person to vote AGAINST the House Resolution to support Iranian dissenters.

Conservative Samizdat on February 13, 2011 at 2:48 PM

This is all very compelling debate, but the facts remain that there is no more polarizing Conservative politician than Ron Paul. I can appreciate his followers wanting the no-nonsense governance he seems to profess. The fact is he doesn’t deliver on even that considering his taste for earmarks himself. But the thing that will ensure he never gets my vote is his foreign policy beliefs. His opinions as to the war, our military and our history of world involvement sounds exactly like what you might expect from the pages of our enemies history books.

Ron Paul will never be the President of The United States.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Sure. Because in no way whatsoever could our foreign policy ever have any repercussions against us.

You probably agree that Carter leaving the Shah of Iran hanging left Iran vulnerable to putting in an anti-American government in it’s place. Right? That’s a foreign policy decision with repercussions, is it not? So why is it now all of the sudden a stretch to think that America supporting that man led to the creation of Iran’s current government? If his ouster had consequences, wouldn’t our support of his existence also have consequences?

Logic alone would say of course any and all foreign policy decisions have consequences. So why keep interfering where we have no right to do so? Where do we have the authority to tell the citizens of other nations what’s good for them?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:50 PM

I don’t know…

… I liked Ron Paul in Bruno.

/

Seven Percent Solution on February 13, 2011 at 2:51 PM

f Ron Paul was the President today instead of Barak Obama, he would have also missed the 3 AM phone call about the Middle East just as President Obama has done.

Ron Paul was the only person to vote AGAINST the House Resolution to support Iranian dissenters.

Conservative Samizdat on February 13, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Why should we care what the hell is going on in Iran? Why are we even voting on a resolution to support anybody? Does voting on something as dumb as this mean anything in real life? Does it help/hurt anybody?

Notorious GOP on February 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM

It’s right there next to the “no Christmas displays,and right under the ban on diplaying the ten commandments.

EXACTLY!!! It doesn’t exist.

No one has said theycan’t.They shouldn’t.

Probably they shouldn’t. But it’s their property, so I guess we don’t really have the right to tell them what to do with it, do we?

I can think of about 317 billion better places for them to build their mosque, as can you, I’m sure. But, that ain’t the point.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM

f Ron Paul was the President today instead of Barak Obama, he would have also missed the 3 AM phone call about the Middle East just as President Obama has done.

Ron Paul was the only person to vote AGAINST the House Resolution to support Iranian dissenters.

Conservative Samizdat on February 13, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Why should we care what the hell is going on in Iran? Why are we even voting on a resolution to support anybody? Does voting on something as dumb as this mean anything in real life? Does it help/hurt anybody?

Notorious GOP on February 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Because, our foreign policy must center around Israel and what they want, never mind the cost to us. Who cares if a resolution supporting them passes that has as much teeth and meaning as a resolution congratulating the 2007 Colorado Rockies on winning the National League Pennant. lol

Israel is what it’s all about…with American money and lives to take care of them.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:59 PM

I don’t know…

… I liked Ron Paul in Bruno.

/

Seven Percent Solution on February 13, 2011 at 2:51 PM

I never saw any of those movies. But that was funny.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 2:59 PM

young people have been slipping away from the Republican party and the conservative movement

Inkblots on February 12, 2011 at 7:05 PM

And then they grow up & come back.
Teaching high school students I can tell you that all this is is the fact that young people are inherently selfish & immature.
No matter how smart & virtuous a young person is, they fall into this category at one time or another during their ‘young’ years.
So the question is, do the older & wiser conservatives let the mobs of young people hijack things when the older & wiser conservatives KNOW their brand of idealism does not WORK?
I say hell no.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 2:59 PM

margategop517 on February 13, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Why doesn’t it surprise me that you guys did that.
Good on ya Girlfriend!
*fist pump*

annoyinglittletwerp on February 13, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Naw, see, because we built military bases on Muslim holy grounds and because we’re an empire forcing our culture on others and the neoconservatives are warmongers and the Joooos control everything and blah blah blah blah blah…we had it coming. Ron Paul 2012!

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Please don’t tell your fiance but…I luv you.
*LoL*

annoyinglittletwerp on February 13, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Probably they shouldn’t. But it’s their property, so I guess we don’t really have the right to tell them what to do with it, do we?

I can think of about 317 billion better places for them to build their mosque, as can you, I’m sure. But, that ain’t the point.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Probably? Hey, maybe you’d like to help build it. Sort of a “Habitat for Humanity”Thng.
They’re going to need some help.

katy the mean old lady on February 13, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Probably? Hey, maybe you’d like to help build it. Sort of a “Habitat for Humanity”Thng.
They’re going to need some help.

katy the mean old lady on February 13, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Sure. Because, after all, defending private property rights means that I’m a “muslim terrorist sympathizer” or want to help them build their damn mosque.

(Is the sarcasm tag REALLY necessary on this one?)

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:06 PM

Sure. Because in no way whatsoever could our foreign policy ever have any repercussions against us.

You probably agree that Carter leaving the Shah of Iran hanging left Iran vulnerable to putting in an anti-American government in it’s place. Right? That’s a foreign policy decision with repercussions, is it not? So why is it now all of the sudden a stretch to think that America supporting that man led to the creation of Iran’s current government? If his ouster had consequences, wouldn’t our support of his existence also have consequences?

Logic alone would say of course any and all foreign policy decisions have consequences. So why keep interfering where we have no right to do so? Where do we have the authority to tell the citizens of other nations what’s good for them?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:50 PM

So if there is a guy that lives in your neighborhood down the street & you know he is a suicidal maniac that is capable of shooting up the neighborhood one day in a fit of rage, you are not going to try & find some way to minimize the oncoming tragedy you KNOW is coming in some way?
See, foreign policy is akin to that.
Are you the same guy that sees the serial killer burying bodies next door in the flower bed & figure it’s none of your business?
Are you the guy who watches granny’s purse get stolen by thugs, maybe slapped around a little, but figures it’s none of your business?
Cuz that is the same kind of thinking.
We live in the world.
The world is our neighborhood, dude.
You cannot ignore things & stick your head in the sand.
We may do things that come back & bite us, but you just cannot sit around & do nothing sometimes.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Again, I would just say that Ron Paul ignores a good deal of what has actually occurred overseas and the motives for our involvement to come up with his very cartoonish foreign policy views. Again, he sounds like he’s parroting the talking points of our enemies.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:10 PM

Oh yeah, the nation-building in Japan and Germany was like a total failure, right?

G M on February 13, 2011 at 1:58 PM

We’re still there, 65 years later, ain’t we?

Is that the definition of “success?”

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Well, The real question is WHY we are still there, isn’t it?

Are we still in Japan and Germany to ‘build’ those nations? Of course not. 65 years ago, that was the purpose. In the interim, we were there for force projection during the Cold War. Now we are there for force projection reasons, generally speaking. You can’t respond to everything from the CONUS.

Are you suggesting we were unsuccessful in our ‘nation building’ efforts in Japan or Germany?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:14 PM

So if there is a guy that lives in your neighborhood down the street & you know he is a suicidal maniac that is capable of shooting up the neighborhood one day in a fit of rage, you are not going to try & find some way to minimize the oncoming tragedy you KNOW is coming in some way?
See, foreign policy is akin to that.
Are you the same guy that sees the serial killer burying bodies next door in the flower bed & figure it’s none of your business?
Are you the guy who watches granny’s purse get stolen by thugs, maybe slapped around a little, but figures it’s none of your business?
Cuz that is the same kind of thinking.
We live in the world.
The world is our neighborhood, dude.
You cannot ignore things & stick your head in the sand.
We may do things that come back & bite us, but you just cannot sit around & do nothing sometimes.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 3:08 PM

It’s not sticking your head in the sand knowing that every time we think we’re helping pschyos or victimized grannies we end up causing new, unintended problems at great cost to us.

What are foreign policy is is to take that gun away from the psycho, only to watch him start stabbing people, or blowing shit up, or starting fires. It’s stopping grannies purse from getting snatched, but watching granny get raped or shot instead. And then losing her purse anyways.

We may and do have the best of intentions, no doubt, but all we’ve accomplished is trading problems instead of solving them.

At what point do we start demanding results from those decisions? I’d have to say we are long past that point now.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM

One thing I would agree with, say for detente, with the Ron Paul supporters. I would remove all foreign aid except for our stanchest supporters like England and Israel for instance. I would bet with the bullies of the world weaker and the good guys like Israel stronger, a lot of the problems overseas that you lament would just go away. Now we can all agree with that, right?

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Now we win the Iowa Straw Poll.

We look forward to making another presidential indicator “irrelevant.”

Spathi on February 13, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Well, The real question is WHY we are still there, isn’t it?

Are we still in Japan and Germany to ‘build’ those nations? Of course not. 65 years ago, that was the purpose. In the interim, we were there for force projection during the Cold War. Now we are there for force projection reasons, generally speaking. You can’t respond to everything from the CONUS.

Are you suggesting we were unsuccessful in our ‘nation building’ efforts in Japan or Germany?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:14 PM

If we STILL have a military presence in those nations that WE are paying for, and not them, then yeah. It’s a failure.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:17 PM

Again, he sounds like he’s parroting the talking points of our enemies.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:10 PM

I’d go one step further – he aids and abets our enemies by actively spreading their propaganda under the color of his elected position.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Now we win the Iowa Straw Poll.

We look forward to making another presidential indicator “irrelevant.”

Spathi on February 13, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Amazing how many polls he won in 2008. How’d that work out?

But yes…you and your ilk do make Ron Paul irrelevant. If he could somehow kick all you truther anti-Israel cranks to the curb, he might actually pull double digits in an election…low double digits.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM

I’d go one step further – he aids and abets our enemies by actively spreading their propaganda under the color of his elected position.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 3:19 PM

I was trying to be polite.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Again, I would just say that Ron Paul ignores a good deal of what has actually occurred overseas and the motives for our involvement to come up with his very cartoonish foreign policy views. Again, he sounds like he’s parroting the talking points of our enemies.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:10 PM

And I would just say that the more I’ve looked into it, the more sense his view actually makes.

One thing I would agree with, say for detente, with the Ron Paul supporters. I would remove all foreign aid except for our stanchest supporters like England and Israel for instance. I would bet with the bullies of the world weaker and the good guys like Israel stronger, a lot of the problems overseas that you lament would just go away. Now we can all agree with that, right?

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:16 PM

You MIGHT be able to convince me about England, since they have long stood at our side in nearly every combat we’ve been involved in. They’ve taken bullets for us, and fairness says we should return the favor when possible when asked.

Any foreign aid past that point though? Why should we? Isn’t England a first world country? Isn’t Israel? Don’t these nations have the capabilities to provide for themselves? Why is it our responsibility as taxpayers to provide this for them if they can’t or choose not to. A major catastrophic event is one thing, here. Sliding money to them each and every year is quite another.

Again, England and military support we may have a real obligation with. But cutting off foreign aid to the entire Middle East, but not Israel, will NOT solve our problems in the Middle East.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:23 PM

I was trying to be polite.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Do you think he really realizes what he’s doing, or that he’s just so brainwashed by the groupthink of Murray Rothbard and his band of anti-semitic libertarian radicals?

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Amazing how many polls he won in 2008. How’d that work out?

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM

He got about 5% of the popular vote, and won zero states.

5% of the republican primary vote – that’s his nominal base. A pathetic showing by any measure, and if he ran again, no doubt at all he would do worse.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM

But yes…you and your ilk do make Ron Paul irrelevant. If he could somehow kick all you truther anti-Israel cranks to the curb, he might actually pull double digits in an election…low double digits.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Awesome! On one page, I not only want to help build a mosque, but now I can be a “truther anti-Israel crank” as well.

Glad my support of Paul isn’t going to waste. lol

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM

I was trying to be polite.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Be as polite as the average Ron Paul supporter.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Again, you’re making an argument for the sake of redistribution – we need to get ours or someone else will. Hardly fiscally conservative. If Pauls constituents (and followers) are really all about the man and his philosophy, then what need have they for earmarked money? They should realize that its a bum rap, but be able to deal with it philosophically and ideologically. Think of it as healing the organism. Every little bit helps. Other Congressman don’t request earmarks and their constituents seem to be ok with it. Why not Paul’s? Fairness?

You guys continue to harp on the size of the problem. I’m saying it doesn’t matter. If we’re spending too much money, we’re spending too much money – period. You’re making the case that since earmarks are relatively insignificant (in your view) then they don’t need to be dealt with (or not dealt with right now, whatever that means) since there are more pressing problems. That’s a cop out and a dodge. “The pipes froze and broke in my house and I need to get that fixed, but I’m going to use my money to buy a super-awesome LCD TV.”

All or nothing. We’re either spending too much or we aren’t. We all agree we are, so we need to STOP spending too much in all of its forms – period.

I’m not talking or dealing around the edges. Earmark supporters are by arguing that earmarks are so small, insignificant, etc. I’m for cutting it all, all extra spending, including earmarks, all of it, right now. End of story. Again, if you’re not, your simply (like Herr Doktor) gaming the system.

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:28 PM

But cutting off foreign aid to the entire Middle East, but not Israel, will NOT solve our problems in the Middle East.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:23 PM

Cutting off aid to Israel will doom them to destruction. The only reason they haven’t been nuked yet is because Saudi Arabia and the surrounding nations know we’ll obliterate them. The instant we withdraw our aid, it will be seen as abandonment.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Awesome! On one page, I not only want to help build a mosque, but now I can be a “truther anti-Israel crank” as well.

Glad my support of Paul isn’t going to waste. lol

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM

I was speaking directly to Spathi. Unless you spam the kind of crap he does, why would you assume I’m talking to you as well?

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Glad my support of Paul isn’t going to waste. lol

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Hey,we’re just reading yourcomments and trying to make you happy.

katy the mean old lady on February 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Do you think he really realizes what he’s doing, or that he’s just so brainwashed by the groupthink of Murray Rothbard and his band of anti-semitic libertarian radicals?

Rothbard would be an anarcho-capitalist, not a libertarian. He opposes the existence of the state in any capacity. A libertarian accepts the “necessary evil” argument of the state, and wants as little of it as possible.

Just a slight difference.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

I was speaking directly to Spathi. Unless you spam the kind of crap he does, why would you assume I’m talking to you as well?

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Sorry. Who the hell is Spathi?

Hey,we’re just reading yourcomments and trying to make you happy.

katy the mean old lady on February 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

And they say conservatives don’t have a sense of humor. lol

Best laugh I had all day, Katy. I had that coming, and it entertained me, too. :)

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:32 PM

Cutting off aid to Israel will doom them to destruction. The only reason they haven’t been nuked yet is because Saudi Arabia and the surrounding nations know we’ll obliterate them. The instant we withdraw our aid, it will be seen as abandonment.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Again, MadCon. When did Israel become an American State? Don’t Israel have nukes, too? A military force? A well-known intelligence agency that’s the envy of most of the world?

Sorry, I have a hard time buying the argument we NEED to protect Israel. They can protect themselves. We have no obligation or ability to afford doing so.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:35 PM

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:24 PM

I’m not sure what motivates the man. I just think he’s wrong.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:23 PM

Dave, this is where one might start getting that hair on the back of their neck feeling when discussing these topics with a Ron Paul supporter. First, the more you comment, the more you do sound like you think what we’ve done overseas was not only folly but unjust. I asked you earlier and your comments were more reserved. Again, I have killed and ordered to kill in this war and if you have strong feelings about what you think about our involvement, I invite you to throw it all out there without mincing words. Second, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to reserve support for Israel. Why do you all lock step want to remove aid from our greatest ally in the region and those I would personally consider my sister faith?

Be as polite as the average Ron Paul supporter.

Rebar on February 13, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Ow.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 3:35 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:17 PM

You’re still not dealing with the why. You probably believe our military presence in those parts of the world is extraneous and simply to further some notion of american imperialism, while failing to recognize the tons of bases we have closed and places we’ve left over the last two decades. I posted a comment about it yesterday.

Your basing your beliefs on a flawed, static viewpoint of the world that doesn’t work.

If we were simply in those places as many Paul supporters believe to further American imperial notions, you would have a point, but again it is a demonstrably false belief.

You think our ‘nation building’ in Japan and Germany is not a success. You equate further military presence in those places (and others) as a sign of failure, failing to reason out why we are in those places now as opposed to 65 years ago. This is also a belief that is demonstrably false.

I would agree with you that there may still be places we could bring troops back from overseas. But that is an ongoing process, it happens all the time and has for decades.

For a group of people who purportedly praise their own sense of history and their grasping of reality and political philosophy, many of you seem to simply be spouting off talking points that are crushed time and again under the simplest of reasoning and fact checking.

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:32 PM

Go back to my 3:20 post, and read.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Dave, this is where one might start getting that hair on the back of their neck feeling when discussing these topics with a Ron Paul supporter. First, the more you comment, the more you do sound like you think what we’ve done overseas was not only folly but unjust. I asked you earlier and your comments were more reserved. Again, I have killed and ordered to kill in this war and if you have strong feelings about what you think about our involvement, I invite you to throw it all out there without mincing words. Second, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to reserve support for Israel. Why do you all lock step want to remove aid from our greatest ally in the region and those I would personally consider my sister faith?

It’s folly and enormous cost alone makes it unjust. We cannot afford these adventures, especially when all we have to show for them is a body count and a bill we can’t afford to pay. It ain’t fair to anyone who has to foot the bill, and to the families who lose their loved ones.

My support of Israel is the same as if I had a friend who always has their hands out for money and help from me whenever they get in trouble. Eventually, they gotta learn to take care of themselves. The First National Bank of the American Taxpayer cannot afford to provide these things to other countries around the world.

We’ve given how many billions upon further billions to Israel since it’s creation? And what do we have to show for it?

Time to cut them, and all of their neighbors off. Maybe if we have an entire region getting nothing from us, they may FINALLY learn to coexist with each other for the sake of their own survival. Or, they won’t. Not our problem either way.

Israel isn’t the image of purity or innocence, either. They have no problem violating agreements with their Palestinian neighbors. Palestine is also no innocent party, either. They have no problem with violating their agreements with Israel. Yet, in spite of this, both sides get a nice draw of money from us, and for what? Their continued back-n-forth bitching and spite that both of them use to play us for more money.

I see no reason to continue subsidizing this failed behavior by either side.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:45 PM

Do you think he really realizes what he’s doing, or that he’s just so brainwashed by the groupthink of Murray Rothbard and his band of anti-semitic libertarian radicals?

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Wasn’t Rothbard Jewish? So was Mises.

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 3:49 PM

The only reason they haven’t been nuked yet is because Saudi Arabia and the surrounding nations know we’ll obliterate them.

Sorry I call BS.

1) It would be questional if the US would “nuke anyone” if Israel was attacked. Hell we didn’t nuke anyone when WE were attacked.

2) Israel has nukes of thier own, they can take care of themselves.

gdonovan on February 13, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Go back to my 3:20 post, and read.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:40 PM

I see now.

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Simplest of reason tells me these two nations should either foot the bill for their own national defense, or start contributing to us providing it for them. Once I see Germany is using money to bailout Greece go towards their own defense, or to us for the favor, then I’ll concede success. But there is no way to honestly say us maintaining a military presence for a length of time matched only by the Cubs last World Series appearance is necessary, let alone successful.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Wasn’t Rothbard Jewish? So was Mises.

Murray Rothbard a Jew? Yes.

Ludwig von Mises a Jew? Yes.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM

You know, I think Reagan – the Arbiter of Conservative Values, the great Ronaldus Magnus himself was wrong for his 1986 amnesty. He effed up, big time.

Why can’t (many) Herr Doktor supporters admit it when their guy is wrong – about anything?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Wasn’t Rothbard Jewish? So was Mises.

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 3:49 PM

And? Rothbard was also best pals with Pat “Hitler didn’t want war” Buchanan.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

They just don’t. Any group in the minority I suppose feel like any intellectual ground they give makes them look weak on any one issue and they can’t have that. I don’t honestly believe they actually believe everything they debate in defense of him.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

You know, I think Reagan – the Arbiter of Conservative Values, the great Ronaldus Magnus himself was wrong for his 1986 amnesty. He effed up, big time.

Why can’t (many) Herr Doktor supporters admit it when their guy is wrong – about anything?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Yeah he was. (Paul isn’t an amnesty guy, either, BTW).

I already said I disagree with him on earmarks. So, does that count?

Otherwise, a lot of what he says does make perfect sense. We’ve tried for decades doing things opposite of what he has been suggesting, and what do we have to show for it? Entaglement in the world’s affairs where we have no business being, a body count that goes hand-in-hand with it, and an enormous bill we can’t afford to pay.

Why NOT try it another way? Because we were attacked by the Japanese about 70 years ago? Check your history, Roosevelt was NOT as “isolationist” as he wanted the 1940 voters to believe leading up to that attack. Saying that does not mean I believe we deserved it (because I don’t believe that), but we did piss off Japan, this is undeniable.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

And? Rothbard was also best pals with Pat “Hitler didn’t want war” Buchanan.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

So what? Rothbard, being an anarcho-capitalist, probably wouldn’t have voted for Buchanan anyways. People who don’t support the existence of the state, any state, in any capacity, tend not to participate in functions involving functions of the state. Like voting and stuff.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:51 PM

Still ignoring the obvious. Is it conscious? We are not in Japan and Germany for THEIR sake. These nations have their own armies (Japan a ‘Defense Force’). The forces we have in those two countries are not significant enough to provide any meaningful defence of the host nation. They haven’t been for decades.

Or are the 100 or so troops we have in Australia there under false pretenses and are really ruling that country under a secret military junta?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

Still ignoring the obvious. Is it conscious? We are not in Japan and Germany for THEIR sake. These nations have their own armies (Japan a ‘Defense Force’). The forces we have in those two countries are not significant enough to provide any meaningful defence of the host nation. They haven’t been for decades.

Or are the 100 or so troops we have in Australia there under false pretenses and are really ruling that country under a secret military junta?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

So, why the hell are we even there then, since they have their own force and we’re just hanging out there anyways?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

So what? Rothbard, being an anarcho-capitalist, probably wouldn’t have voted for Buchanan anyways. People who don’t support the existence of the state, any state, in any capacity, tend not to participate in functions involving functions of the state. Like voting and stuff.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

So he would have reacted to Buchanan’s clear contempt for his heritage by…not voting for him?

You know what? Consider my comments to Spathi also directed to you, on second thought. The grasping at straws is quite similar.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Or are the 100 or so troops we have in Australia there under false pretenses and are really ruling that country under a secret military junta?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

lol, I have a friend currently in an aviator exchange program in Australia. I sure didn’t know he was a tool of the state spreading ill will around that region.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

I said (many) supporters. You are one of the few on this very thread who has said as much.

Why NOT try it another way?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Why not? Why not tell Herr Doktor and his other rabid fans, even in this very thread, to convince (or try to) Herr Doktor to give up earmarking? give it a shot?

Maybe he’d get some small measure of credibility back?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

So he would have reacted to Buchanan’s clear contempt for his heritage by…not voting for him?

You know what? Consider my comments to Spathi also directed to you, on second thought. The grasping at straws is quite similar.

MadisonConservative on February 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Noted.

Now purged from my “Things I Care About” list.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

So, why the hell are we even there then, since they have their own force and we’re just hanging out there anyways?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Did you even read the rest of my comment? See, you say something like this and I get the impression you’re purposefully being obtuse or perhaps even trolling.

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Why not? Why not tell Herr Doktor and his other rabid fans, even in this very thread, to convince (or try to) Herr Doktor to give up earmarking? give it a shot?

Maybe he’d get some small measure of credibility back?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Because, I didn’t realize Rep. Paul’s credibility was entirely defined by what I can convince his other supporters to support and oppose.

Earmarking is a small problem in the grand scheme of things. It’s the spending itself being authorized that’s the real problem. It’s “pink eye” and “zombies”

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Which is why I don’t get the immediate assumption that Paul supporters are “rabid antisemites” or something. I’m gonna confess I’ve met a few *ahem* conspiracy nutjobs among his supporters, but I never met a neo nazi.

According to Wikipedia and the YAF and YAL (Young Americans for Liberty) websites, YAF only has about 20 college chapters, which in only a few short years, YAL has about tripled. YAF doesn’t list its membership, but YAL has 15,000+ members.

Seems pretty short sighted to kick libertarians out of the “big tent,” especially when that’s where all the youth energy is…

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Did you even read the rest of my comment? See, you say something like this and I get the impression you’re purposefully being obtuse or perhaps even trolling.

Still ignoring the obvious. Is it conscious? We are not in Japan and Germany for THEIR sake. These nations have their own armies (Japan a ‘Defense Force’). The forces we have in those two countries are not significant enough to provide any meaningful defence of the host nation. They haven’t been for decades.

Or are the 100 or so troops we have in Australia there under false pretenses and are really ruling that country under a secret military junta?

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

Where again does it say why we are there?

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

BSD,

What do you claim your cause is?

Really Right on February 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Seems pretty short sighted to kick libertarians out of the “big tent,” especially when that’s where all the youth energy is…

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Insofar as seeking people of like-mindedness politically, I think there’s a better than fair chance they were looking for quality of numbers and not quantity.

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Which is why I don’t get the immediate assumption that Paul supporters are “rabid antisemites” or something. I’m gonna confess I’ve met a few *ahem* conspiracy nutjobs among his supporters, but I never met a neo nazi.

According to Wikipedia and the YAF and YAL (Young Americans for Liberty) websites, YAF only has about 20 college chapters, which in only a few short years, YAL has about tripled. YAF doesn’t list its membership, but YAL has 15,000+ members.

Seems pretty short sighted to kick libertarians out of the “big tent,” especially when that’s where all the youth energy is…

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Yeah, I think I have met a few of those CT types as well, at least indirectly.

I once clicked on a link that led me to some Alex Jones sight, and there was about twelve comments I read.

Sadly, that’s two minutes of my life I’ll never get back.

(Uh-oh – I may lose my libertarian cred. here. I don’t like Alex Jones. Shhhh. Please don’t tell on me.)

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:16 PM

We may and do have the best of intentions, no doubt, but all we’ve accomplished is trading problems instead of solving them.

At what point do we start demanding results from those decisions? I’d have to say we are long past that point now.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM

So none of the things we have ever done regarding foreign policy have ever resulted in any benefits for us at all?
Sorry but I would rather support despot #1 that we can handle vs despot #2 that we can. Then later on when the opportunity presents itself, we can support a real democratic leader, if it ever does.
The key to protecting oneself is keeping the chaos OUT of your backyard.
Nourishing friendships & contacts throughout the world is important.
If you cannot understand that, then you are seriously delusional.
I am sorry to say that bcs there are times I wholeheartedly agree with you.
This is not one of them.
I find Ron Paul alarmingly unhinged regarding the rest of the world.
So much so I consider him an enemy of this country.
I’m not saying you can save everyone & always do the right thing.
But the Federal Govt has an obligation to keep this country safe.
And if that means pissing some people off by meddling in some affairs when it threatens our way of life, then so be it.
And you are way off base on the Israel thing.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Because, I didn’t realize Rep. Paul’s credibility was entirely defined by what I can convince his other supporters to support and oppose.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Why not? You obviously think it is worth your time and effort to enforce and defend Herr Doktor’s stances on such things as earmarks and his foreign policy positions with people who disagree. Yet you won’t do anything to convince him (or other supporters of his) of something you don’t agree with about those same policies and positions.

I thought you guys were free thinkers and open minded and all of that? You guys are so blinded by your devotion to this guy you not only can’t see his own faults but your unwilling to see your own or confront others about them.

Absolutely incredible…

catmman on February 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

despot #2 that we can’t.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Badger State Dave, I have to go, but I really do wish you would readdress that question I asked earlier. Like I said, in reading more of what you’ve written about Ron Paul’s stances on foreign policy, I get the impression you’re right there with him on all of his opinions. I’m surmising then that you think my involvement in this war is unjust and that our enemies were more just. So, yes or no, is what we did unjust? Ron Paul has said so in no uncertain terms he feels that way. Is he wrong in this one position?

hawkdriver on February 13, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Seems pretty short sighted to kick libertarians out of the “big tent,” especially when that’s where all the youth energy is…

Firefly_76 on February 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Please read my above post regarding libertarian-minded youth.

Badger40 on February 13, 2011 at 4:19 PM

BSD,

What do you claim your cause is?

Really Right on February 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

I support having my civil liberties (and yours) remain intact, scaling back our foreign involvement, and a constitutionally-consistent (as I’m gonna find) voting record. I support the moves to audit and/or eventually eliminate the federal reserve. Added bonus points for someone who isn’t pro-amnesty, or worse, pro-choice.

Give me THAT candidate, and you have my interest.

Give me big government statists like a Huckabee or Romney, and you may as well keep Obama far as I’m concerned.

Badger State Dave on February 13, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7