Jim DeMint: It’s time to start listening to Ron Paul

posted at 7:53 pm on January 11, 2012 by Allahpundit

November 2010: “You can’t be a fiscal conservative and not be a social conservative.” Today: “What I would like to see is a Republican Party that embraces a lot of these libertarian ideas.” Those two statements aren’t directly contradictory — like DeMint, plenty of Republicans want more libertarianism on fiscal, but not social or foreign, policy — but it’s amazing to hear a guy known for being a strong conservative across the board talking up a candidate who’s often dismissed as catering to doves and libertines. Is this genuine respect or simple strategic caution? Dan Foster of NRO makes the case for the former:

Look, I don’t think Paul has a serious chance to win the nomination, but to my surprise he has run a quite serious campaign. Watching his speech last night confirmed this. Paul knows he is a million-to-one shot to win, but he also knows that if it comes down to just him and Romney, with the vote floor he’s established early, that he could run as high or higher in a lot of states, and come to the convention with a non-trivial number of delegates and an agenda. His holding fire on, and even defending, Romney from Perry/Gingrich attacks confirms the strategic sophistication of his campaign. Paul’s defense of free enterprise is certainly a principled one. But it also supports his interest in seeing the field winnowed down. It might also reflect a desire not to do damage to the presumptive party nominee — whom Paul has suggested he prefers to Obama — if he can build a strong position without doing so. Either way, Paul has shown a level of rationality and maturity that contradicts the caricatures.

Yeah, I agree that Paul has won respect even among his critics in the GOP establishment for running an effective campaign. How could he not have? Most of the campaigns this year are so astoundingly incompetent that they can’t even manage to get on the ballot in every state. Like Romney, he’s earned points simply for metaphorically showing up to his job interview in a suit. But there is, of course, a strategic consideration here: DeMint’s obviously and correctly worried about the GOP losing votes from Paul’s fans in November if they feel alienated. Some of those votes are lost regardless because, for some, Paul is The Only Man Who Can Save America. But some simply prefer him on the merits to the rest of the field and others are voting for him as a protest vote. A chunk of those can be won back with an “Anybody But Obama” argument, but the more their candidate is dismissed as a crank now, the harder it’ll be. (A WaPo poll last month found Obama and Romney tied at 47 percent head to head, but if Paul is added to the equation as a third-party candidate, Obama wins by 10 points.) DeMint’s taking the perfectly mainstream line that libertarians have lots of good ideas about spending and deserve to be heard in hopes that that’ll be enough.

Will it, though? I’ve never had the sense that cutting spending was the animating principle behind the Paul phenomenon even though it’s at the core of his platform. He might consider it the animating principle, but whenever I read or watch interviews with his most devoted supporters, foreign policy seems to come up much more often. (For all the lip service paid to drug legalization as being key to his youth appeal, I don’t see that come up especially often either.) I don’t know how you square that circle, even in a more war-weary party. It’s one thing to support a more modest international presence, it’s another to question the Bin Laden raid that pretty much everyone in America not named “Ron Paul” thinks was fantastic. If I’m right that foreign policy is key for most Paul fans, there’s really not much that can be done to keep them happy in the party. I keep thinking Rand Paul is going to build the bridge here simply because he’s managed to keep a foot in the mainstream and a foot in the Paul universe in a way that his dad never has, but we’ll see. If anyone in the family ends up getting a big role at the convention to win over Paul voters, I’d bet it’s Rand rather than Ron.

Exit question: Is Paul really doing dramatically better than expected at the polls this year, as most of this morning’s pundit CW claims? He’s improved on his 2008 numbers dramatically, but he’s running against a weaker field with a much better organization in a political climate (ever longer wars and mind-boggling debt) that’s vastly more favorable to him. Finishing a distant second in New Hampshire is great, but it was a distant second to a guy whom roughly 70 percent of the party dislikes for being a soulless RINO. If we do end up with a two-man Romney/Paul race, Mitt will win it likely without needing to run a single negative ad against him. If you can’t make the flip-flopping architect of RomneyCare sweat, how much heat do you have? Click the second image to watch.


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 2 3 4

I don’t think DeMint saying we should listen to Ron Paul is the same as endorsing him. I don’t support Ron Paul, but I don’t think it’s fair to call his supporters neo-nazi’s. I believe in God, and for that reason I would have wanted to go to Germany to save the Jews and I would want to support Israel now. Other people in this country thought we should have gone to save the chrisians in Africa, and that we didn’t because we are racist. I think it’s a fair question to ask though, if we are the world’s policeman. If we are, then why didn’t we go to Darfur or Rowanda or any of the other places we didn’t go? How do we decide these things?

Night Owl on January 11, 2012 at 10:54 PM

I tell ya, I cannot get enough of you referring to the Holocaust, i.e., the extermination of 6 million jews, as “how they treat their own people”. I think if you look up the word “minimize” in the dictionary, there is a new entry.

deadrody on January 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM

6 million? No. Most of that 6 million were not “their own people”… they were in fact mostly Polish and Soviet.

And the fact that Germany was going around invading other countries and capturing their resources wss a legitimate concern of US policy makers.

The fact that they were killing people, Jewish or otherwise, was not.

But let’s play a little game, shall we? Let us assume that, instead of invading France, Russia, and Poland, Germany simply said to them: As part of a treaty, in which Germany guarantees peace, and maybe even gives some other diplomatic goodies, you (Russia, France, Poland) allow units of our military to work with your military and civilian law enforcement to round up your Jews for “concentration” in Germany. And let us further assume that Russia, France, and Poland agreed to this arrangement.

Do you really think that the US would go to war over such an arrangement, then or now?

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

The innocence, and ignorance, of youth.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:44 PM

I was a paratrooper in the 82nd from 1980-84. I know the Cold War era very well, thanks. What about you? Did you actually ever do anything to earn that patronizing, superior air you’ve adopted, or is yours just another case of unwarranted self-importance?

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

I’m a Party of Lincoln Republican, and I want Paul and his Truther pals and Stormfront skinheads and Prison Planet paranoids out of the GOP, publicly disavowed by Republican candidates and leaders. So by all means, Paulbots, vote Libertarian. I understand Gary Johnson needs all the help he can get. Better yet, latch on to the Democratic Party like the malignant little parasites you are. Let them put up with your malignant, cult-like behavior, your rampant cheating and bigotry and weird little conspiracies. It would serve them right.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Fair enough, but Paul is the only candidate bringing the youth vote into the party. Without him, how will the GOP survive?

angelat0763 on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:26 PM

dead on, there were dozens of neo-nazis
from stormfront volunteering and canvassing Iowa for Paul, and not a peep of protest:

2009: Ron Paul cites ‘tragedy of Gaza’

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=252828

Ron Paul and his viewpoint on the ” Jewish question”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O285w-9Qr0s&context=C3219efaADOEgsToPDskI1L0mbvkbjwv_fwKvu4qEE

Jews are vicious rats. America is just a goddamn Jew country. They’re a bunch of goddamn crooks there. The Jews control everything and everybody. The United States is a farce controlled by dirty, hook-nosed. circumcised Jew bastards.

The American Free Press, which markets books like “The Invention of the Jewish People” and “March of the Titans: A History of the White Race,” is urging its subscribers to help it send hundreds of copies of Ron Paul’s collected speeches to voters in New Hampshire. The book, it promises, will “Help Dr. Ron Paul Win the G.O.P. Nomination in 2012!”

Don Black, director of the white nationalist Web site Stormfront, said in an interview that several dozen of his members were volunteering for Mr. Paul’s presidential campaign, and a site forum titled “Why is Ron Paul such a favorite here?” has no fewer than 24 pages of comments. “I understand he wins many fans because his monetary policy would hurt Jews,” read one. [...]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/us/politics/ron-paul-disowns-extremists-views-but-doesnt-disavow-the-support.html?pagewanted=all

golembythehudson on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

As a Ron Paul supporter I have to say that you really misunderstand Ron Paul’s foreign policy. Within two weeks of 9/11 he went to Congress to get letters of marque to send elite special forces after the terrorists, Constitutionally. Had that been done, we wouldn’t have gotten bogged down in a land war fighting an entire nation, resulting in the cost we’ve had in lives and treasure, while the terrorists got away. When Obama took out Bin Laden he essentially did what Ron Paul suggested to begin with, only without following the Constitution.

Ron Paul feels that nuclear submarines could be used must more cost effectively for much of our mobilization and that long range missiles could be a bigger focus of our defense as well. In fact, as a cold war warrior he opposed the SALT treaties because they limited the US from developing its missile strength and updating, while allowing the Soviets to do so, and in reliance on promises he didn’t trust. Just because someone disagrees on the best weapon to use and how to use it does not mean they are a pacifist.

windwardtack on January 11, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:47 PM

And they call the Paul supporters the conspiracy theory fanatics? The modern day GOP has lost touch with America. At this point, the best thing they could do is open up the primaries to independents. Because the closed system they’ve got now is producing “Conservatives” like Romney and Gingrich, who lean much farther to the left than Paul ever will.

angelat0763 on January 11, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Yes, Paul is a conspiracist and so are many of his supporters.

The GOP wins nothing if it loses elections.

We don’t marry a President, we hire someone to do a job better than their competitors, or, with that expectation.

I’m as disgusted with Gingrich as anyone but with Romney, at least the man is experienced in managing and managing well economic and financial issues. By the way, Ron Paul isn’t.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Did you actually ever do anything to earn that patronizing, superior air you’ve adopted, or is yours just another case of unwarranted self-importance?

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Studied, taught and practiced politics most of my life. At least enough to know that, in fact, in 1964 when the Chinese got the bomb, there were in fact people who said that they would engage in bolt-from-the-blue nuclear attacks.

Usually, they were gung-ho clowns who thought the uniform meant they knew better.

History proved otherwise.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:58 PM

OK, that anti – Jew stuff is really over the top. I’m a mod at a site Ron Paul supporters go to and every once in a long while, say every few months, someone will turn up trying something much less bad than the rabid tripe above. They are, of course, banned.

Take care.

windwardtack on January 11, 2012 at 10:58 PM

angelat0763 on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

My son is voting for the first time this year-and has vowed to never vote for Paul.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 10:58 PM

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Thank you for your service.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 10:59 PM

windwardtack on January 11, 2012 at 10:56 PM

How exactly does one use a nuclear submarine for “mobilization”?

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 11:00 PM

I don’t support Ron Paul, but I don’t think it’s fair to call his supporters neo-nazi’s.

Night Owl on January 11, 2012 at 10:54 PM

Some of Ron Paul’s supporters are neo-nazis, yes. Some are un-informed regarding Dr. Paul’s current and past associations, as well as the full range of his ideas. Slightly less than half of those voting for Paul in New Hampshire were Democrats, and I’m guessing the same is probably true for Iowa–as well as most other state primaries in the months ahead. The Democrats want Paul to do well since it would then be easy to paint the GOP with the extremist brush.

Tell you what, go lurk on Stormfront and look around. I won’t link to it but it’s easy enough to find. They love Dr. Ron Paul on Stormfront.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Slightly less than half of those voting for Paul in New Hampshire were Democrats,

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:02 PM

And once again, you are full of shiite.

Not that I’m surprised.

Paul got 24% of the 4% of the vote that was Democrat. He got 16% of the 49% of the GOP vote.

Now, for those of you who aren’t math-challenged, which is larger: 16% of 49, or 24% of 4?

Dumbarse.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Do you really think that they haven’t planned for such a contingency? Do you think that we haven’t planned for such a contingency.

I think you underestimating how easy it is to choke of the power. And power is one part of it, we’d be hitting other stuff that they need for the program also. I also think it takes more power to enrich than your giving credit. That power isnt on site in the bunker, at least not at all of them.

If they get a weapon (which they will, if they so choose), then we had better be prepared to engage in diplomacy…

Its better to stop it now when the cost is low than to take a chance of letting it get out of hand.

just like we did with the Soviets, and just like we did with the Chinese (who we were also told were irrational actors, at the time).

Thats funny because I dont remember being told they were irrational actors durring the cold war. What I do remember is that the Soviets did feel that there was an exceptable number of losses and did work to that end with civil defence, Missle defence, and other stuff. They never bought into MAD as we did under that bastard McNamara.

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Studied, taught and practiced politics most of my life. At least enough to know that, in fact, in 1964 when the Chinese got the bomb, there were in fact people who said that they would engage in bolt-from-the-blue nuclear attacks.

Usually, they were gung-ho clowns who thought the uniform meant they knew better.

History proved otherwise.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Don’t understand your swipe at the military in this context. Lots of people feared irrational behavior from a nuclear China, especially since Mao would periodically go on a murder binge and kill millions of his own people. His behavior wasn’t rational, and he had control over their nuclear arsenal. It was a legitimate concern. I guess you’re diminishing the legitimacy of that concern because it doesn’t fit the Paulian boilerplate.

Do you ever tell your students to think for themselves or do you just pass out old Ron Paul newsletters? Do you warn them about the dangers of water fluoridation? I understand Dr. Paul is very worried about water fluoridation and government mind control.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:09 PM

I am a mildly enthusiastic supporter of Ron Paul and I can assure you, AP, that while his audit-the-Fed and drug legalization stances have my full and enthusiastic support, his foreign policy is a significant detriment. That’s why I prefer RP as a cabinet member rather than POTUS, and glad that he’s angling just for that.

Now, even the foreign policy is not completely absurd. For one, I’d like to see the US dismantling military presence in Europe and letting them pay for their own defense. I also have a nice compromise between getting out of Middle East and ensuring lasting peace: how about we melt Iran into a big radioactive glass lake?

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:10 PM

troyriser_gopftw @ 11:02

For some reason my copy and paste isn’t working. I’m sure some of them are. I did sneak over to that Stormfront web-site a long time ago. I don’t like that we are even to the point when we are talking about a choice between Paul and Romney. I believe Paul is anti-semitic or he wouldn’t have the associations he has. I don’t plan to vote for him, although I don’t know why I worry about it because PA doesn’t have their primary till May, so it will all be decided by the time it gets to me. Are you saying that all libertarians are neo-nazi sympathizers?

Night Owl on January 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM

Dumbarse.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:06 PM

That’s twice you’ve called me very unkind things while hiding behind an Internet pseudonym. Feeling brave, anonymous twit? Remember: feeling brave isn’t the same as being brave. When you call someone names while hiding behind online anonymity, you aren’t being brave.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM

How exactly does one use a nuclear submarine for “mobilization”?

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 11:00 PM

When you go from point A to point B you do it by “mobilization”. If it stayed in one place it would be “immobilization”.

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Don’t understand your swipe at the military in this context. Lots of people feared irrational behavior from a nuclear China, especially since Mao would periodically go on a murder binge and kill millions of his own people.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:09 PM

No, no sky-is-falling fearmonger said the Soviets or Chinese would definitely nuke wherever, USA.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Consistency appears to not be your friend.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:15 PM

When you call someone names while hiding behind online anonymity, you aren’t being brave.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM

At what point did online courage enter the discussion? Or are you trying to distract from the fact that you have made contradictory statements and been caught in the act?

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:17 PM

Are you saying that all libertarians are neo-nazi sympathizers?

Night Owl on January 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM

No, I’m not saying all libertarians are neo-nazi sympathizers and believe I made that clear when I used the word ‘some’, as in ‘some of Ron Paul’s supporters are neo-nazis, yes’. Not all, certainly, but they do represent a particularly vociferous minority of his support base.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:19 PM

No, I’m not saying all libertarians are neo-nazi sympathizers and believe I made that clear when I used the word ‘some’, as in ‘some of Ron Paul’s supporters are neo-nazis, yes’. Not all, certainly, but they do represent a particularly vociferous minority of his support base.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:19 PM

Interesting flame war you have here guys. May I ask, do you imply that there are no neo-Nazi sympathizers whatsoever among Romney supporters?

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Shaking my head at the party of stupid. The time to start worrying about Ron Paul was in 2006. The time to worry about Obama was 2004. They did neither.

Connie on January 11, 2012 at 11:24 PM

At what point did online courage enter the discussion? Or are you trying to distract from the fact that you have made contradictory statements and been caught in the act?

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:17 PM

You’ve called me names you wouldn’t likely use in IRL conversation with anyone. I call you yellow for doing it. I’m not trying to divert attention from anything. Just pointing out a very obvious fact.

And again: No one–at least no one reputable–claimed the Chinese would certainly bomb San Francisco or wherever. The problem was the ‘certainly’ part of the equation. Mao was unpredictable and no one, least of all his people, knew with certainty what he might or might not do. The Russians were viewed as ideologically driven but sane.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Interesting flame war you have here guys. May I ask, do you imply that there are no neo-Nazi sympathizers whatsoever among Romney supporters?

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I have seen no evidence of Nazi support for the Romney candidacy– unlike the case of the good Dr. Paul, where ample evidence exists that some of Paul’s supporters are rabid Jew-hating, Hitler-loving, swastika-wearing neo-nazis going full retard.

Comes down to it, I don’t think your typical Aryan Nations skinhead would feel at home in a Romney rally. Just a hunch.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Comes down to it, I don’t think your typical Aryan Nations skinhead would feel at home in a Romney rally. Just a hunch.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Well, me and my daughter being Israeli Jews, and we were just fine on Ron Paul’s meeting in NH. They probably didn’t get the meme that they’re supposed to go full Nazi on us. :)

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Are you Sabras? Just curious
(For those who don’t know-a ‘Sabra’ is a native-born Israeli that’s all it is.)
Back on topic: Mitt hasn’t gotten endorsement from Don Black, David Duke, and the IHR. They endorsed Ron Paul.
The religious leader of Iran hasn’t said that a Romney presidency would be good for Iran…he said it about a Ron Paul presidency.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 11:41 PM

You’ve called me names you wouldn’t likely use in IRL conversation with anyone.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Don’t bet on it.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:46 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 11:41 PM

“Sabra” is the right word. No, I’m “Vatik”, a Russian born who moved to Israel many years ago. Hence my triple citizenship.

As to RP’s foreign policy, particularly its Middle Eastern part, I’m not happy with it, either. You’re preaching to the chorus here. It just stinks so goddamn much to choose between losing my new country to banana republic style socialism in 5 years and losing it to a nuclear strike in 20.

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:47 PM

And again: No one–at least no one reputable–claimed the Chinese would certainly bomb San Francisco or wherever. The problem was the ‘certainly’ part of the equation. Mao was unpredictable and no one, least of all his people, knew with certainty what he might or might not do. The Russians were viewed as ideologically driven but sane.

Curtis LeMay

That’s the reason some schools of thinking don’t rule out a destruction of the Chinese military potential before the situation grows worse than it is today

Curtis LeMay, calling for preemptive strikes against a nuclear China.

Now, where have I heard such nonsense recently?

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Well, me and my daughter being Israeli Jews, and we were just fine on Ron Paul’s meeting in NH. They probably didn’t get the meme that they’re supposed to go full Nazi on us. :)

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Followed the link on your name and checked out the current page on your blog and it seems to me you’re being just a tad bit disingenuous, Archivarix. You imply you’re a foreigner–no, wait, you don’t imply it: you state it outright, yet the No Representation Without Taxation blog to which you link and the username your using indicate you as the blog creator. The blog itself is a friendly enough affair featuring quotes by the Founders interspersed with humorous political graphics–straight-up Americana, even patriotic. The posts are by ‘Rix’, whose profile description lists ‘Rix’ as a statistical analyst living in Montville, New Jersey.

Insofar as I know, Ron Paul supporters in New Hampshire have nothing against New Jersey–unless, of course, they watch Jersey Shore.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:57 PM

Don’t bet on it.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:46 PM

I’d bet on it, tough guy.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Short answer? Yes, I think we can continue bashing Paul and his supporters and win in the Fall. Can’t bash Paul or his supporters enough, in my view. Everyone with a semblance of good sense should make Paul-bashing a hobby, a national past-time. Laugh that reptile in a bad suit off the national stage.

I’m a Party of Lincoln Republican, and I want Paul and his Truther pals and Stormfront skinheads and Prison Planet paranoids out of the GOP, publicly disavowed by Republican candidates and leaders. So by all means, Paulbots, vote Libertarian. I understand Gary Johnson needs all the help he can get. Better yet, latch on to the Democratic Party like the malignant little parasites you are. Let them put up with your malignant, cult-like behavior, your rampant cheating and bigotry and weird little conspiracies. It would serve them right.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Troy, you better start looking for a new party pretty soon. :)

Pitchforker on January 12, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Archivarix on January 11, 2012 at 11:47 PM

My late grandfather was born in Chernigov(came to the US as a small child) and he lost more family to Stalin than he did to Hitler.
I tried to convince my dad that we needed to make aliyah -when I was a highschooler) and my father ripped such a new one that I never brought it up again.
I’d love to visit Israel someday and do some genealogy research @ the Yad Vashem.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 12, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Curtis LeMay, calling for preemptive strikes against a nuclear China.

Now, where have I heard such nonsense recently?

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Bother to read the quotes you post. Curtis LeMay was not calling for preemptive strikes against nuclear China. He said ‘some schools of thought’ considered a first-strike against China was a viable option. Truth is, a first-strike is always a viable option if the Commander-in-Chief knows with certainty that an enemy is going to attack. Had the US Navy deciphered Pearl Harbor-related Japanese encrypted traffic prior to December 7th, do you think Roosevelt would’ve been justified in preempting their attack? I do.

But hey, no worries, Paulbot. Obama wouldn’t dream of provoking the Iranians in an election year, no matter what the Iranians do. They even plotted a bombing of a Washington restaurant recently, and without retaliation from us. If the President actually did something, he would his base. Can’t have that.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:08 AM

* Make securing our borders the top national security priority.
* Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.
* Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.
* End the nation-building that is draining troop morale, increasing our debt, and sacrificing lives with no end in sight.
* Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.
* Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.
* Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.
* Revitalize the military for the 21st century by eliminating waste in a trillion-dollar military budget.
* Prevent the TSA from forcing Americans to either be groped or ogled just to travel on an airplane and ultimately abolish the unconstitutional agency.
* Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.

RecoveringNeocon

Decoski on January 12, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Followed the link on your name and checked out the current page on your blog and it seems to me you’re being just a tad bit disingenuous, Archivarix. You imply you’re a foreigner–no, wait, you don’t imply it: you state it outright, yet the No Representation Without Taxation blog to which you link and the username your using indicate you as the blog creator. The blog itself is a friendly enough affair featuring quotes by the Founders interspersed with humorous political graphics–straight-up Americana, even patriotic. The posts are by ‘Rix’, whose profile description lists ‘Rix’ as a statistical analyst living in Montville, New Jersey.

Insofar as I know, Ron Paul supporters in New Hampshire have nothing against New Jersey–unless, of course, they watch Jersey Shore.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:57 PM

‘Rix’ is short of ‘Archivarix’; you should have noticed that. In any case, it isn’t much of a blog, but rather a storage for politics-related stuff that I like. You should have also noticed that I mentioned my triple citizenship – Russian, Israeli, and American.

Now, I do live in New Jersey, but had the pleasure of driving my college-age daughter to a libertarian meeting in New Hampshire. She could have driven there by herself but I reasonably suspected that New Hampshire trip, libertarian meetings, and teenage driving don’t mix well. :)

Archivarix on January 12, 2012 at 12:09 AM

Troy, you better start looking for a new party pretty soon. :)

Pitchforker on January 12, 2012 at 12:00 AM

I hear that. Guess I’ll have to take Lincoln with me when I go, too. I gather Ron Paul and his supporters aren’t big on Lincoln.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Now, I do live in New Jersey, but had the pleasure of driving my college-age daughter to a libertarian meeting in New Hampshire. She could have driven there by herself but I reasonably suspected that New Hampshire trip, libertarian meetings, and teenage driving don’t mix well. :)

Archivarix on January 12, 2012 at 12:09 AM

I have a college-age daughter, myself. Teenage driving doesn’t mix well with anything.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:12 AM

Had the US Navy deciphered Pearl Harbor-related Japanese encrypted traffic prior to December 7th, do you think Roosevelt would’ve been justified in preempting their attack? I do.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:08 AM

By the logic that you would apply to Iran, we would have invaded Japan before they acquired gunpowder.

JohnGalt23 on January 12, 2012 at 12:14 AM

I have a college-age daughter, myself. Teenage driving doesn’t mix well with anything.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:12 AM

I have a teenage son. I hear ya both.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 12, 2012 at 12:21 AM

By the logic that you would apply to Iran, we would have invaded Japan before they acquired gunpowder.

JohnGalt23 on January 12, 2012 at 12:14 AM

You are aware the US Navy had intercepted coded transmissions from the Japanese, right? And these encrypted transmissions revealed Japanese intentions to attack Pearl Harbor? And that the code-breakers didn’t decipher them in time to counter the attack? You do know this? This was not a hypothetical situation. The logic employed is straightforward enough: if an enemy is preparing a surprise attack, then preempt the attack, stop the attack, and defeat the enemy.

Iran has claimed for years that its nuclear program was for purely peaceful purposes. This has been proven to be a lie–and a rather transparent one, at that. They’re currently working on a new generation of ballistic missiles, with their latest model, the Shahab 3, capable of reaching over 1300 kilometers, and are working feverishly on yet even longer range, possibly achieving ICBM capabilities in as few as three years. Further, there is strong evidence to suggest the Iranians have been working with Chavez to establish missile launch sites in Venezuela. And so on. Appeals to reason with a Paulbot are futile.

Look, the point of argument is to persuade. You are not going to persuade me the US is a pawn of an evil Zionist cabal of international bankers and I am not going to convince you that sanity is an entirely healthy and desirable thing. Let it go.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:33 AM

I hear that. Guess I’ll have to take Lincoln with me when I go, too. I gather Ron Paul and his supporters aren’t big on Lincoln.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM

You mean, this Abraham Lincoln? Looks like he would be welcome to Aryan Nation events with open arms. :)

Archivarix on January 12, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Well, with the choice the Republican Party is putting on the table it is sad. Is the the best we have to offer the American People? If Romney gets the nomination, which he will, and there is a decent Independent running, I will vote Independent. I do not support Romney and I will not hold my nose like I did with McCain any more. this stuff of “it’s his turn” is dumb. Just to prove that is what this is, Perry will be the next candidate from the Republicans. When, 2020 I believe. So, I am going to vote for a person who is Conservative, not one that is Conservative by East Coast Standards. Conservatives need to take the Republican Party back and soon if we are going to save the Nation.

old war horse on January 12, 2012 at 12:41 AM

By the logic that you would apply to Iran, we would have invaded Japan before they acquired gunpowder.

JohnGalt23 on January 12, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Yeah cause gunpowder=Nuke. Nice distortion there.

Sultanofsham on January 12, 2012 at 12:43 AM

I hear that. Guess I’ll have to take Lincoln with me when I go, too. I gather Ron Paul and his supporters aren’t big on Lincoln.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM

My husband’s Ronbot friend(whom I refuse to even be in the same room with) considers Lincoln to be a war criminal.
Really.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 12, 2012 at 1:02 AM

could he not have? Most of the campaigns this year are so astoundingly incompetent that they can’t even manage to get on the ballot in every state. Like Romney, he’s earned points simply for metaphorically showing up to his job interview in a suit.

Are you guys never going to give Ron Paul credit ? it is even fantastic that you are minimizing Mitt Romney too in this quote.

Exit question : When was the field any strong in the last 20 years ?
H Bush debacle, W Bush RINO feast and McCain debacle sounds like a GOP tradition of strong fields (lol)

Sams88 on January 12, 2012 at 3:36 AM

You mean, this Abraham Lincoln? Looks like he would be welcome to Aryan Nation events with open arms. :)

Archivarix on January 12, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Oh that crazy Lincoln! Look at him attack the South because Northern farmers couldn’t compete with free labor.

In all seriousness, this is going to become a Romney/Paul race pretty soon here. They both have far larger war-chests than the other candidates and are holding position against all comers. Perry will be out after SC and FL. Santorum and Gingrich are going to beat each other up trying to prove their tea party credentials (of which they have none) in the effort to be the not-Romney. Oh, there’s Huntsman! Who are we kidding? So start asking yourself how comfortable you really are with Romney as your nominee. Would you like to watch him debate Obama–what with Romneycare being the basis for Obamacare? Do you really think his conservative credentials pass the sniff test?

TL,DR: Start getting comfortable with Ron Paul if you don’t like Romney, or hope Palin joins late.

The 48er on January 12, 2012 at 4:14 AM

Let me just say:

1.) It’s early
2.) My coffee maker seems to be on the fritz
3.) My stresso-meter is bottoming out
4.) Pitt/Jolie 2012

Ugly on January 12, 2012 at 6:29 AM

I find pretty impressive the idea that either head of that snake in Washington named Party can turn nearly everyone here against someone else here.

The problem is not R or D. That’s an illusion fostered by the two-headed snake named Party to provide us all with the illusion of choice.

The big problem is the snake itself.

Note that when the names and affiliations change in Washington, the policies don’t. The same tyranny continues to creep into our lives through legislation, the same trashing of the Constitution occurs–R or D.

If the two heads of this snake named Party are so different, explain the votes on extending the Patriot Act, the NDAA, SOPA, etc. I’ve asked this same question at least a hundred times, yet no one can come up with any real significant differences other than to blame Obama as if he and the Democrats were the only enemy and not being aided and abetted by the Republican establishment.

Until you all realize who your enemy actually is, you’ve got no chance of defeating it. Because of your willful ignorance, America loses, our children lose, and freedom in the world will become just a myth perpetrated by oral storytellers because one day, sooner than you think, both heads of that snake in Washington named Party will decide to rewrite History to exclude God, Country and Constitution, not to mention the Revolution and our Founders.

Now, if you want to continue arguing amongst yourselves about which head of that snake in Washington is better, or which face of either head of that snake in Washington is better, be my guest. But never can you say from this point on that you didn’t know or that you weren’t warned.

M.L. Bushman on January 12, 2012 at 7:26 AM

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Please don’t call names. What you posted is designed to silence–it should be beneath you. Additionally, it is based on a conclusion you erroneously leaped to.

I made a simple observation that any conservative should agree with–passing laws is not generally a sign of a political success to conservatives. And, when you consider the big government juggernaut that has been Congress for the past few decades, holding the line has been more faithful to the Constitution than what most so-called conservatives have done.

Although I agree with Paul in some areas–such as the Fed–there are important areas on which I disagree. I am one of the people who thinks the GOP has a sorry batch of candidates. But because you brought it up, who is it you support, and why?

DrMagnolias on January 12, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Lincoln was the first neocon. he didnt free the slaves because he wanted to, he did it because he had to for political reasons.

and no, i am not a racist. i am not talking about whether freeing the slaves was the right thing to do…it was. i am talking about the motivations of the man in charge at the time.

racists of all stripes and colors are abhorrent, but they will always be with us, and many of them will vote and be vocal about politics. Ron Paul, unfotunately, has done and said enough in his long life to the the national politician they can root for. I dont think Paul is their first choice…they would rather have David Duke, but Paul is their best choice of the current big contenders. like i said…thats unfortunate, as it taints Ron Paul for the rest of us originalists that like 70% or more of his platform.

do you really like everything any of the candidates stand for? how much of their platform do you like? we all have different “non-starters” that we use to justify the “i’ll never vote for him/her” statement. for me, its Romneycare and Fannie/Freddie lobbying.

i really wish Perry would catch fire again, but he wont. Paul and Santorum are still on my short list.

Coolidge_Conservative on January 12, 2012 at 7:45 AM

Coolidge_Conservative on January 12, 2012 at 7:45 AM

Capitalization and apostrophes are something I look for in a candidate.

Ugly on January 12, 2012 at 8:11 AM

Coolidge_Conservative on January 12, 2012 at 7:45 AM

Capitalization and apostrophes are something I look for in a candidate.

its a comments board, get over yourself.

Coolidge_Conservative on January 12, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Do you warn them about the dangers of water fluoridation? I understand Dr. Paul is very worried about water fluoridation and government mind control.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:09 PM

I think he’s rightly concerned about government mass medication via the water supply. Pretty much takes personal choice out of the picture, but hey, keep telling yourself you’re for limited government and that it’s the government’s job to make sure we have healthy teeth. National security issue and all that.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 8:57 AM

I believe Paul is anti-semitic or he wouldn’t have the associations he has.

Night Owl on January 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM

You mean like Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Milton Friedman, people whom he calls his teachers and friends?

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 9:01 AM

I believe Paul is anti-semitic or he wouldn’t have the associations he has.

Night Owl on January 11, 2012 at 11:13 PM

You mean like Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Milton Friedman, people whom he calls his teachers and friends?

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Actually, I think he is referring to his domestic policy adviser, Bruce Fein.

JohnGalt23 on January 12, 2012 at 9:08 AM

They even plotted a bombing of a Washington restaurant recently, and without retaliation from us.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:08 AM

I would laugh out loud at anyone who believes this, but it’s more sad and scary than funny. No, there was no bomb/assassination plot by Iran.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 9:27 AM

I hear that. Guess I’ll have to take Lincoln with me when I go, too. I gather Ron Paul and his supporters aren’t big on Lincoln.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM

By all means, please do. The man was a racist tyrant who did more to destroy the union than save it. You keep wanting to use slant associations to smear Paul and his supporters, but did you ever wonder why liberals and leftists love Lincoln? What does that say about you?

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I hear that. Guess I’ll have to take Lincoln with me when I go, too. I gather Ron Paul and his supporters aren’t big on Lincoln.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM

If you want people who aren’t ‘big’ on Lincoln, take a look at the Neo-Confederate KKK wannabees around here who are still store about their great-grandfather’s ‘property’ being liberated.

I’ve NEVER heard a fellow RP supporter rag on Lincoln, for what that’s worth.

MelonCollie on January 12, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Hey, guys, thought this was an interesting read … definitely in the spirit of DeMint:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/in_defense_of_libertarians.html

MeatHeadinCA on January 12, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Frankly, if the GOP is doing damage to their brand in this primary, it is primarily by pretending Ron Paul isn’t a whack job, AND that he actually is a Republican

And that most of the others aren’t really dems in disguise.

There, fixed it for ya.

landowner on January 12, 2012 at 10:36 AM

DrMagnolias on January 12, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Bite me. This is a political forum, where people give their opinions. I call them as I see them, and people don’t tell me what to say or how to say it. Do you see the irony of you telling me that I am trying to tell people what to say and how to say it?

JannyMae on January 12, 2012 at 10:43 AM

I agree with Ron Paul’s stance on personal liberties. The US gubmint should not be picking and choosing winners. Whether in foreign policy or in domestic matters, our gubmint is so large that we need to find things to do. Reduce the size of the gubmint so it can’t be up in everybody’s business.

The state governors and the congress should be the most powerful leaders in the US. States need to stop deferring to the feds in everything. Of course, the feds use education and highway funding as a club to impose their will on the states. I thought Perry was actually going to make some progress towards reclaiming states’ rights, but he got distracted (squirrel!) by a big white house in DC, and then all his talk about states’ rights went nowhere.

While we are repealing Obamacare, lets also repeal the 16th and 17th amendments. This would go a long way to reducing the size gubmint, because the funding would dry up.

Repubs can’t just dismiss all of Ron Paul’s ideas as nutty. We’ve listened to Demorat ideas for far too long. Libertarians are now more closely aligned with Repubs than the Socialist-Demorat party will ever be.

conservablogger on January 12, 2012 at 10:54 AM

While I don’t agree with everything Ron Paul says, I do like him mostly for his fiscal conservative approach. Romney hasn’t give details about what he’d cut or how much. His track record, not his rhetoric, says that he’s basically a big government statist.

Additionally, Romney like many of the others, aren’t too concerned about being real Constitutional Conservatives like Paul. A good example is the recent vote and passage of the NDAA. Even Obama admitted that this horrible piece of legislation fives him, the executive power, the right to detain US citizens on US soil indefinitely without due process (the 5th Amendment). Why hasn’t this been an issue? Because Romney, like Obama, Bush, McCain, and others, don’t care about individual liberty and personal freedoms.

MoreLiberty on January 12, 2012 at 11:18 AM

In 1981, the Israeli air force bombed a nuclear power plant in Iraq. The United Nations condemned it – so did President Reagan. In fact, the Reagan administration even halted the shipment of F-16s to the Israeli military for awhile. But you know who did support Israel’s right to defense? It was Ron Paul – he supported their rights while most of the US Government didn’t.

MoreLiberty on January 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I hear that. Guess I’ll have to take Lincoln with me when I go, too. I gather Ron Paul and his supporters aren’t big on Lincoln.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Hey! Leave me out of this. Besides, I’ve only got a few more months here in the ‘stan, and the US Army frowns on desertion. And what makes you say Ron Paul doesn’t like me, is it my making fun of zoomies?

LincolntheHun on January 12, 2012 at 11:50 AM

NRO’s comment “plenty of Republicans want more libertarianism on fiscal, but not social or foreign, policy” explains why neither party is able to balance the budget and why Paul has his appeal. Our forefathers wanted the individual States to deal with social policy, not the federal government. The Constitution is not about social policy, it’s about core issues that if the government focused only on those core issues, we could balance the budget. Paul is not anti-conservative, he just believes conservative social policy is something that should be handled by the states not by the federal government.

There is not a single GOP candidate other than Paul who has a plan to balance the budget, not a single GOP candidate other than Paul who wants to return the dollar to pre-1973 strength (when international transactions involving the dollar were pegged to Gold).

Imagine if 2-4 years from now Russia or China pegged its money to Gold, the US Dollar would immediately collapse except if it pegged itself to Gold first, and only Paul is talking like this. We’re so exposed to major issues (unbalanced budget, an unanchored fiat currency) and only Paul is addressing these issues.

If you think Paul’s stance on foreign policy is so bad, then why are more soldiers donating to Paul than all other GOP candidates combined?

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 11:53 AM

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Gold? Really? There’s a finite supply of gold (like any commodity) so that means that any currency pegged to gold could only grow so large and then you would either have to devalue the dollar, or risk inflation. Besides what would keep countries from dumping or other attempts at manipulation, as has been done in the past?

LincolntheHun on January 12, 2012 at 12:01 PM

My question to the Paulbots: While I agree with Paul on his fiscal policy and returning back to the Constitution. What’s the good of fiscal discipline if you are smoldering at ten million degrees from Iranian nuclear weapon?

Scorched_Earth on January 12, 2012 at 12:09 PM

LincolntheHun, our dollar was pegged to Gold up until 1973 for foreign transactions. That is in my lifetime, maybe not yours. It was not the end of the world then. Nixon is the one responsible for taking us off the Gold Standard. Last I heard, there was a finite supply of gold prior to 1973 and that did not stop the world having international transactions tied to Gold. Pegging the dollar to Gold would not devalue the dollar, having it pegged to the printing press as it is now, is what devalues the dollar.

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Scorched_Earth, the GOP will not win with manners that you have. When you call a supporter of Ron Paul a PaulBot, you show extreme prejudicial hostility. Paul is winning 20% support in the primaries, if those voters stay home or not vote GOP because of these hostile insults, then the GOP might as well fold up and close shop.

I thought it was the Leftists who could not civilly debate, looks like a lot of the Right has decided to mimic their rude behavior.

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Scorched_Earth said:

“My question to the Paulbots: While I agree with Paul on his fiscal policy and returning back to the Constitution. What’s the good of fiscal discipline if you are smoldering at ten million degrees from Iranian nuclear weapon?”

First off even if they had one they couldn’t reach American shores. Additionally, it is Israel that is at actual risk. Lets let them take care of it like they did when they attacked Iraqs nuclear facilities in 1981. Speaking of that, guess who denounced the Israeli’s for that attack – The United Nations and the Reagan administration. Guess which congressman actually vocally supported Israel – Ron Paul.

I remember when the liberals and neocons were drumming the Iraq has WMDs lie. We should let the countries that are most at risk deal with this problem. We give Israel billion, let them deal with it.

MoreLiberty on January 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM

JannyMae on January 12, 2012 at 10:43 AM

There is no irony in asking you to speak respectfully to me, public forum or not. Apparently, you are unable to have a civil conversation. Had I known this, I would not have remotely entertained the hope that you were able to rise above schoolyard responses. Thank you, this has been enlightening.

DrMagnolias on January 12, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Do you warn them about the dangers of water fluoridation? I understand Dr. Paul is very worried about water fluoridation and government mind control.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 11:09 PM
I think he’s rightly concerned about government mass medication via the water supply. Pretty much takes personal choice out of the picture, but hey, keep telling yourself you’re for limited government and that it’s the government’s job to make sure we have healthy teeth. National security issue and all that.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Dante shows up. Hilarity ensues.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM

I remember when the liberals and neocons were drumming the Iraq has WMDs lie. We should let the countries that are most at risk deal with this problem. We give Israel billion, let them deal with it.

MoreLiberty on January 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Oh, yeah, the WMDs ‘lie’. So tell me, who do you think carried out the 9-11 attacks? Bush? Cheney? Haliburton? Mossad?

You know, I’m think I’m going to start calling myself a neoconservative. Whatever they are, they seem to get under the skin of Ron Paul supporters in a big way. I like that. Do I need to be Jewish to qualify? Do I get an Illuminati discount card? How about a seat at the next meeting of the Bilderbergers or the Council on Foreign Relations? Free rides at Six Flags?

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 1:17 PM

troyriser_gopftw, cheerleader for government’s compulsory mass medication project; mocker of liberty and personal choice.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 1:22 PM

troyriser_gopftw, cheerleader for government’s compulsory mass medication project; mocker of liberty and personal choice.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 1:22 PM

You caught me fair and square, true patriot. Yes, I’ve been advocating governmental mind control via water fluoridation for years–decades, even. I’ve also been arguing for expansion of our DNA hybridization projects. I mean, spider-goat hybrids are great and all but they just don’t do anything. Whose idea was that, anyway?

In any event, our secret is out. There’s nothing for it now but Plan B, a scheme so diabolically evil and convoluted that only the most depraved enemies of liberty could possibly have conceived it. I won’t go into details or give you the location of the countdown clock in our super-secret FEMA fortress, but wheels are in motion, my old enemy, wheels are in motion. The wheels turn slowly but they turn. And if they turn in a big circle, they eventually come back around. And if they come back around, then they eventually end up where they started…

I’m sorry, what were we talking about?

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Check out:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/287960/ron-pauls-appeal-among-military-david-french

“A fact that many of Ron Paul’s supporters mention to rebut claims that he is dangerous on national security is his overwhelming financial support from the military, and it’s true. While I don’t know the most recent numbers, as of mid-2011, he had received more money from service members than Barack Obama and all other Republican challengers combined.”

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 2:29 PM

“A fact that many of Ron Paul’s supporters mention to rebut claims that he is dangerous on national security is his overwhelming financial support from the military, and it’s true.”

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 2:29 PM

It doesn’t follow that financial support from military members translates to ‘Ron Paul is not a menace to national security’. Paul’s Fortress America defense strategy would be disastrous. Either we as a country assume an active role in international affairs or we consign ourselves to irrelevance and–ultimately–to nonexistence.

Paul’s idea of national defense is akin to a child throwing a blanket over his head to keep the monsters away. That particular strategy only works if the monsters aren’t real.

troyriser_gopftw on January 12, 2012 at 2:48 PM

You Paultards!

That’s wrong. It costs us nothing to be nice. Nothing. What’s the point? Is there anything gained? And even Hannity says he “agrees with Paul’s domestic proposals.” Unity, and the proper target perspective (Obama), is what we should strive for, at all costs. And again, being nice to Paul supporters cost $0. Also, be understanding.

anotherJoe on January 12, 2012 at 2:50 PM

anotherJoe on January 12, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Try telling that to the Paultards. They brought it on themselves.

catmman on January 12, 2012 at 4:06 PM

I would laugh out loud at anyone who believes this, but it’s more sad and scary than funny. No, there was no bomb/assassination plot by Iran.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Yeah it was a CIA false flag right? That is what your type likes to say. Put your tinfoil hat back on and take your meds.

Sultanofsham on January 12, 2012 at 4:18 PM

catmman, I strongly concur with your sentiment. But who is hated more, then, Paul supporters or Obama? And the Paul supporters are typically youngsters. So give them a few inches. I hope we focus on the proper target (O), and seek to rise above the ill-feelings and find unity if possible. Let us, not the Paul supporters, lead the way.

anotherJoe on January 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM

It’s not just youngsters who are for Paul, it’s also a lot of establishment GOP former delegates (like me) who are tired of nobody running except Paul who is focused on the budget, returning the dollar to pre-1973 strength, and having states do the conservative social policy thing–it is none of the federal government’s business 99% of the time to do social policy. Our budget is busted because too many voters and politicians want the federal government to act like a large state. Bush was fine as a TX governor, but then he wanted to treat the whole nation like it was a giant TX. It is not the federal government’s business to be involved in social policy. It is not called “These United States” for nothing.

I was originally for Bachmann because she is most like Paul on the budget, but I don’t remember her talking about these other issues. But when Paul past her in spades, I changed to Paul.

Where are the conservatives of the days of Reagan and Goldwater? The conservatives of today seem to be nothing but Bushians who are running the country broke. Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, Gingrich, they’re all causing the country to go broke.

Yet wanting to balance the budget makes one hated like they’re a Nazi and on this board. Unbelievable how hostile the right has become and I always considered myself to the right of the normal person on the right. Maybe that’s true, for those to the left of me do not know how to carry on a civil debate.

marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Yeah it was a CIA false flag right? That is what your type likes to say. Put your tinfoil hat back on and take your meds.

Sultanofsham on January 12, 2012 at 4:18 PM

No, it wasn’t the CIA, it was the DOJ; and it wasn’t a false flag operation, no more than a cop posing as a prostitute to entrap would-be johns is a false flag operation. It was a “sting” that was completely set up by the DOJ. They were the ones who created the phony plot in order to lure some rube into it, and then they could claim how great they are at foiling terror plots. Unfortunately for them, none of it passed the smell test, which is why the administration quickly dropped any discussion about it.

Tom Woods

Fake Iran terror plot

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 8:03 PM

No, it wasn’t the CIA, it was the DOJ; and it wasn’t a false flag operation, no more than a cop posing as a prostitute to entrap would-be johns is a false flag operation. It was a “sting” that was completely set up by the DOJ. They were the ones who created the phony plot in order to lure some rube into it, and then they could claim how great they are at foiling terror plots. Unfortunately for them, none of it passed the smell test, which is why the administration quickly dropped any discussion about it.

Tom Woods

Fake Iran terror plot

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Nice claim but I dont see any real proof of your claim in those websites anymore than I see about area 51 on pro-UFO sites. Saying it cant be true because it would help the “War Party” isnt proof.

Sultanofsham on January 12, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Ok, keep your head in the sand and repeat after me: We have always been at war with Eastasia.

Dante on January 12, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Yet wanting to balance the budget makes one hated like they’re a Nazi and on this board.
marti124 on January 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM

No, the years of running a newsletter that in fact supported the positions of Nazis, and wanting to abandon our allies makes one hated on this board.

The crazy ideas like Wanting to go to a gold standard without the gold required to back it, or his 9-11 rants just gets you laughed at.

Wanting to balance the budget is actually one of the few Ron Paul positions that gets support… I’m not sure why you think it’s that one that is hated.

When your supporters and fellow travelers are actual Nazi’s; and they support you due to your conspiracy theories and hateful racist accusations in a newsletter with your name and signature for decades… that might be a problem.

But feel free to pretend the only problem anyone has with Ron Paul is his domestic economic policies… although if you’re going to ignore reality and make things up in your head; why not pretend everyone loves Ron Paul and there is no problem?

Since you’re willing to live in a pretend world anyhow; why not pretend it’s nicer than the one you’re working with now?

gekkobear on January 13, 2012 at 6:26 AM

Since you’re willing to live in a pretend world anyhow

gekkobear on January 13, 2012 at 6:26 AM

Irony, considering the rest of your post.

Dante on January 13, 2012 at 8:37 AM

gekkobear writes: “The crazy ideas like Wanting to go to a gold standard without the gold required to back it, or his 9-11 rants just gets you laughed at.”

We were pegged to gold in 1973, you act like that is thousands of years ago. Only international transactions had the backing of gold then. If we were to go back to gold, the peg would be X-dollars to 1 ounce of gold at the current position of gold. The impact would be to prevent further devaluation of gold unless the government had that amount of gold. The government would not be backing all dollars, only international transactions that want gold-cashed in. As long as the dollar does not devalue, the cost to the government would be at the point of the pegging, nothing more than trading existing dollars for existing gold. The government has considerable gold in Ft Knox anyway and doesn’t need to purchase additional gold unless the foreign government wants the redemption in gold. As long as the dollar holds its value or becomes more valuable (due to the pegging of Gold), the dollar holds equal value. I know this is way beyond many people’s comprehension though and thoughts like this lead to harsh insulting.

There are plenty of credible economists who are backing a gold pegging, and a recent public opinion poll showed nearly 60% of the American public want this.

What do you think will happen to the US Dollar if either China or Russia beats the US to pegging its currency (or at least its international transactions) to Gold?

There are ideas of Ron Paul’s past I don’t like and if any GOP candidate was anywhere a constitutionalist, I’d go for them instead, but there are currently no such candidates.

There are plenty of bigots who support any of the existing GOP Candidates, so that charge is baseless and meaningless. You don’t judge a candidate by their most fanatic fringe supporters.

marti124 on January 13, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Important Public Opinion Polling findings:

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/reason/Articles/~3/ZjQbbvnJZBU/ron-paul-rising-evidence-from-national-p

“In sum, Iowa, New Hampshire, and aggregated Reason-Rupe poll data suggest Ron Paul captures the votes of young Americans under 40, independent non-partisans, strong fiscal conservatives, and those previously disengaged from the political process. Although many political pundits intransigently continue to perceive the political world as a dichotomy along a left-right political spectrum, Paul’s success appears to be largely owed to the many Americans who do not fit neatly along a socially/economically liberal vs. socially/economically conservative spectrum.”

If the GOP ignores Ron Paul, they’ll lose large numbers of voters under 40 and also independents. They can’t win an election if they can’t win those two blocks of voters.

Very detailed analyses. Good article.

marti124 on January 13, 2012 at 1:05 PM

I made a typo in my posting:
marti124 on January 13, 2012 at 11:33 AM

It should read (one sentence):

“The impact would be to prevent further devaluation of the US dollar unless the government did not have that amount in gold.”

marti124 on January 13, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Judge Napolitano endorses Ron Paul as the People’s Choice against Mitt Romney. What a fantastic endorsement and video. The buildup is just great!

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/freedom-watch/index.html

January 13, 2012
The People vs. Mitt Romney

Judge Napolitano explains why Mitt Romney is the establishment’s pick to maintain the status quo and how conservatives can build coalitions to defeat him.

marti124 on January 13, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4