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

Bmore on January 11, 2012 at 9:32
I’m far from a Palin fan(no sh*t-right)but I could vote for her if needed.
My issue on THIS thread is Herr Doktor Luap Nor and his fawning minions.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Don’t know where Morgenthau was born but Henry the K came to the US from Germanyduring the early-mid 30′s. Had his family stayed they most likely would have been murdered…which would’ve been okay with you since what Hitler was doing wasn’t really our concern anyway.
///

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM

What’s the Constitutional/Founders’ case for attacking Germany because of their horrendous policies towards Jews?

I’m curious. Why do you believe we should have declared war on Japan?

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Don’t know where Morgenthau was born but Henry the K came to the US from Germanyduring the early-mid 30′s. Had his family stayed they most likely would have been murdered…which would’ve been okay with you since what Hitler was doing wasn’t really our concern anyway.
///

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Morgenthau too came from Germany, and was in fact, Jewish.

He is also the father of modern realism. Which holds, quite plainly, that human rights concerns always… always… are at the bottom of the list when dealing with other nation-states.

In short, we don’t give a damn how they treat their own people. All we care about is how they treat us, and how they sit within a balance-of-power relationship.

If you can’t handle the cold realities of foreign policy, you can always stick to domestic policy.

Or knitting.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:33 PM

He IS a Jew-hater.
You have officially jumped-the-shark.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM

I defy anyone to watch Paul’s speech from last night…

Inkblots on January 11, 2012 at 8:07 PM

He was both irrational and apparently not able to keep in mind the context of where he was and what he was saying.

Go ahead, defy anyone, it won’t make Ron Paul any more rational than, say, Louis Farrakhan: sometimes they make sense, most of the time otherwise they rant but they can always be relied on to thoroughly enjoy their own performances.

Paul is an embarrassment to the Right, an utter embarrassment. DeMint has lost his credibility with this encouragement of Paul’s candidacy and overall ‘messaging’.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Iraq is starting to come in at somewhere around $2 trillion, and in case you haven’t noticed, Iran is three times the size of Iraq.

So, what exactly is the budget for a war with Iran?

JohnGalt23

If you have to lie, your argument must really suck.

Remind me again why Ron Paul shouldn’t bolt the GOP?

JohnGalt23

He SHOULD bolt the GOP.

xblade on January 11, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Marshall Petain, leader of Vichy France, wasn’t installed by the Nazis, but was very anti-Semitic. He and the French around him had no problem rounding up Jews for the Nazis.

This “Paul wants to kill the Jews” stuff is just nonsense. He has views on the State of Israel that are comparable to many others in both the Demoncrat and Repub parties. I doubt if he stays up nights plotting pogroms.

Name-calling like this is more comparable to Nazi tactics than anything Ron Paul says. Time to cut it out.

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM

As for Morgenthau, he did not promote naked national interest in foreign policy, but national interest informed by American morality.

Lightspeed on January 11, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Informed. Certainly not governed.

And faced with war against an industrial superpower, over how they treated their own people, Jewish or otherwise? Do you really think Morgenthau, or any of the realists, would say: Yes, Mr President, that is a cause worthy of war.

Something tells me you know better.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Iran has a no-first strike policy. They have a messed up theocratic dictatorship, but ever since the rev0lution, they have been true to their word on this. They won’t use nuclear weapons.

Just like they dont aid terroist, just like they dont send arms and train insurgents that kill our troops. Give me a break.

If the only country to ever actually nuke cities full of civilians (the US) had a major party trying their hardest to pick a fight with you, and you knew that same country left countries with nukes alone, what would you do? You’d have to be retarded not to want nukes.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Thats nice. Do you let them get nukes and go from and airstrike game to a city busting game when they do all the other stuff they’ve done over the past 30 years? Your fine with it then I take it?

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Mr. Kissinger said. “And if they put Jews into gas chambers in the Soviet Union, it is not an American concern. Maybe a humanitarian concern.”

Was Kissinger right?

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Well, that’s all a nice kind of spin but what does that kool-aid really taste like? Your candidate, Ron Paul, has said, and repeated, “If I were an Iranian, I’d want a nuke, too.” You people hear what the Iranian leadership says about wiping Israel and the Great Satan (us) off the face of the earth and their announced desire to welcome the twelfth imam, their version of judgment day, and you see all the death they have dealt or financed, since the 80s, here and all over the world, and you wish to ignore what they could really do to us when go nuclear. You’re living Oz or Wonderland or on a Mother Ship somewhere so removed from this land or reality that you cannot be reached.

TXUS on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

He IS a Jew-hater.
You have officially jumped-the-shark.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Calm down now. Pop some pills. If Ron Paul is a Jew hater, why does he hang out with teh joos?

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:43 PM

inspectorudy on January 11, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Many of us think not passing laws is actually a plus.

DrMagnolias on January 11, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Somewhere in there, he makes a point but his overall message continues to be derision of humanity. He derides, he’s a negative, destructive man. Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Please show ME the derision the negativity and the destructiveness within Ron Pauls speech:

There was… there was one other acknowledgment I wanted to make. I wanted to thank the Union Leader for not for not endorsing me.

(LAUGHTER)

Now, I called Governor Romney a short while ago, before he gave his talk, and congratulated him, because he certainly had a clear-cut victory. But we’re nibbling at his heels.

(LAUGHTER) (APPLAUSE)

But there was another victory tonight. He had a victory, but we have had a victory for the cause of liberty tonight.

(APPLAUSE)

There is, there is no doubt there is no doubt that this whole effort that we are involved in will not go unnoticed, let me tell you.

(APPLAUSE)

I think the intellectual revolution that’s going on now to restore liberty in this country is well on its way, and there’s no way they’re going to stop the momentum that we have started.

And that is the victory that you have brought about, because you have been the ones that have done the works. There’s a lot of people here, but the ones across the country, the donors and the excitement on the campuses… it’s just unbelievable.

We don’t always get the coverage or the interest shown on what — what is going on, because if they did, they wouldn’t, they wouldn’t be ignoring so much of what we’re doing.

But, you know, I find it sort of fascinating when they finally get around (and this is different people, it could be in the media, could be our opponents, or whatever) but I sort of have to chuckle when they describe you and me as being “dangerous.”

(APPLAUSE)

That’s one thing they are telling the truth, because we are dangerous to the status quo of this country.

(APPLAUSE)

AUDIENCE: President Paul! President Paul! President Paul! President Paul! President Paul!
President Paul! President Paul! President Paul! President Paul!

PAUL: And we will remain a danger to the Federal Reserve system, as well.

(APPLAUSE)

Yes. And the Fed, right… yeah.

You know, in studying monetary history from the beginning of our country, and even throughout all of history, monetary policy on periodic occasions will come, [will] become the dominant issue.

And we have emphasized that, and it has become an important issue.

Just think: This is the first presidential campaign that the subject ever came up since the Federal Reserve was started.

So we are now: because of what is happening, it will remain a dominant issue. There’s no way they’re going to put it to bed, because they have destroyed our money. It’s worldwide. There’s a financial crisis going on. And it’s only sound money and personal liberty that can solve the crisis that we have today.

(APPLAUSE)

But the one reason, the one reason I talk about the monetary system so much, it was a sneaky, deceitful way to pay the bills.

You know, an honest government that wants to be a big spending government would tax the people, and then the people would know what they were doing.

If, if we had to pay taxes for everything that they do, you know, the people would rise up and, and stop it.

So then they started borrowing money a lot, and then people didn’t notice that quite as much, because they didn’t pass that on.

But then they resorted to the printing of the money. And that is why the Federal Reserve was established, to take care of the powerful interests, the military industrial complex, the banking system, and deficit financing.

And there’s a couple of reasons they have deficit financing. Sometimes there are conservatives that want deficit financing, and sometimes there are liberals who want deficit..

(BOOS)

And they have resorted, they have resorted to this. And, of course, this is why we are facing this crisis today.

But it also serves those interests who like to think that we have this responsibility.

They claim it’s a moral responsibility to take our young people, put them into the military, and send them hither and yon around the world, policing the world, and using up the money.

(BOOS)

So just, just as we have been able to bring to the forefront that most important issue of funny money, fiat money, the paper money system, the Federal Reserve, we have brought to the forefront… others have tokenly talked about it. They get in office and they do nothing about it.

But right now, it is this liberty movement, which is seen as a patriotic movement, an individual liberty movement, that is saying to the country and to the world, we’ve had enough of sending our kids and our money around the world to be the policemen of the world. It’s the time to bring them home.

(APPLAUSE)

AUDIENCE: President Paul! President Paul! President Paul! President Paul! President Paul! President Paul!

PAUL: Bring them home.

AUDIENCE: Bring them home! Bring them home! Bring them home! Bring them home! Bring them home!

PAUL: The one thing is, is we do know they will come home. My goal and our goal has always been to bring them home in a deliberate fashion, to avoid major economic crisis by destroying our economy by spending so much overseas.

In the last 10 years, the wars that have gone on have added $4 trillion of debt. And I don’t think we have been one bit safer for it. I think we have been less safe because of all the money that we have spent overseas. So this is the issue now. It is, it is an issue that I think is crucial.

Jim mentioned in the introduction that, you know, so often they say that if we tell people that we think we should spend less in the military, they say, “Oh, that means you want to cut defense.” No, if you cut the military industrial complex, you cut war profiteering, but you don’t take one penny out of national defense.

(APPLAUSE)

And besides… besides, we’re flat-out broke. Fortunately, we did not have to fight the Soviets. The Soviets brought themselves down for economic reasons. Do you know that they were so foolish and thought themselves so bold that they could pursue their world empire that they invaded Afghanistan?

(BOOS) (LAUGHTER)

But we will come home, but if we do it now, calmly and deliberately, we can save our economy here at home, because there are a lot of people who are suffering here at home.

You have to stop the inflation, because that’s what destroys the middle class, and that’s what transfers the wealth from the poor and the middle class to the wealthy.

And that is why the wealthy got their bailouts and the middle class shrunk and they lost their jobs and they lost their houses.

So this is what we have to do. We have to cut the spending. This is why I have made a token suggestion in the first year in office: We would cut at least $1 trillion from the budget.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, the one thing that, the talk you hear in Washington is pure talk, because there is nobody suggesting, the other candidates are not talking about real cuts. They’re talking about cutting proposed increases out in 10 years.

They say, oh, we’ll cut a trillion dollars. Yeah, a trillion dollars over a 10-year period, which is $100 billion every year. Our national debt is going up in real terms $100 billion every month, and they claim that’s cutting, and they’re yelling and screaming, “Oh, we can’t cut, we can’t cut.”

We do have to cut. We have to live within our means, if we want to be able to at least take care of the people who have been made to be so dependent on the government. I mean, we have to work our way out.

I would say if we did this and cut this overseas spending, at least we might be able to allow the Social Security beneficiaries to get their checks and medical care be provided. But if we continue to do what we’re doing, the results are that the dollar is destroyed, and the whole thing comes apart, and it’s going to be worldwide phenomenon.

Already, already Social Security beneficiaries are suffering a lot. Their income is shrinking because the value of the dollar is going down, so they’re getting, they’re getting their checks cut. And that is why you have to think about the cutting and stopping the inflation.

But overall, you have to ask, once again, as our founders did, what should the role of government be in a free society? The role should be very simple: the protection of liberty!

(APPLAUSE)

AUDIENCE: Ron Paul revolution, bring us back our Constitution. Ron Paul revolution, bring us back our Constitution. Ron Paul revolution, bring us back our Constitution. Ron Paul revolution, bring us back our Constitution.

PAUL: Wonderful, wonderful. You know, the Constitution was written for a very precise manner. It was not designed to restrain the individual, not to restrain you: it was to protect your liberties and to restrain the federal government.

(APPLAUSE)

But liberty, liberty has to be re-emphasized because we have been careless over the last 100 years.

We have taken liberty and chopped it up into pieces. Some people think liberty has to do with personal habits, which I agree. Other people think liberty is how to spend your money, and they defend that part and then they fight about when to do what.

I think what we need to do is make this emphasis that liberty means you have a right to your life and your privacy and the way you want to live your life, as long as you don’t hurt people, and you have a right to keep and spend your money as you want to.

But freedom, freedom is a wonderful idea, and that’s why I get so excited. But I really get excited when I see young people saying it. It is a wonderful idea. Freedom is popular, don’t you know that?

(APPLAUSE)

Freedom brings people together.

I think it’s magnificent that the crowds that have come out over the weeks and months have been very diverse, because it should be, because some people want their freedom to practice their religious one way, maybe another way. Some might not even want to practice it at all.

But freedom, if you understand it, you should all fight for freedom because you want to exert your freedom the way you want.

Same way with economic freedom. It should bring people together. And I think this is one reason… people worry about, how are you ever going to put in a coalition or how are you going to… oh, no, they don’t want a coalition. They say, how are you going to compromise and give up some of your beliefs in order to get some things passed?

You don’t have to compromise. What you have to do is emphasize the coalitions that people want their freedoms for a different reason and bring them together.

(APPLAUSE)

It’s been, America has been the greatest country ever, the most prosperous country ever, the largest middle class ever. It’s not that way today. Our middle class is shrinking. The country is getting poorer. The wealth it’s apparent is based on debt. The few who really hold the wealth, it’s mal-distribution because it shifts over due to the regulations that control the government.

We have had too many people too long in the last 100 years thinking that it was beneficial more to be, to have high-paid lobbyists to, to get and to find out what they can get from the government, rather than us petitioning our government in a proper manner, petitioning our government and demanding our freedoms back again.

Now, a lot of times, they give us, they give us trouble, and they say, freedom, you people are just too selfish. All you want to do is have your freedom. You know, and, and…

(LAUGHTER)

They, they, they argue that that is the case. But the thing of it is, the people, the bleeding hearts (and I understand them and I recognize them, and I believe most of them are well intended), but it doesn’t work, is the problem.

All that good intentions, of saying, we’re going to give everybody a free house and have no loans and then they can borrow against, you know, the equity, and look what happened. It was a bubble. It burst. And they lost their houses.

So the, the humanitarian instincts are there across the board. What we have to convince them, if you are a true humanitarian, you have to fight and argue the case for free markets, sound money, property rights, contract rights, no use of force, and a sensible foreign policy, so we don’t waste our resources.

(APPLAUSE)

We’re, we’re well on our way. We’re well, we’re well on our way. People have asked me, what did I expect 5, 10 years ago? I had no idea. I always assumed that the best I could do is set a record. I didn’t know you were out there.

But it’s, it’s no longer that irate, tireless minority that is stirring up the troops. Now that irate minority (and so tireless, as you have been) it’s growing by leaps and bounds. It’s going to continue to grow by leaps and bounds. And we will restore freedom to this country.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM

He IS a Jew-hater.

You have officially jumped-the-shark.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Murray Rothbard and Bruce Fein hardest hit.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM

I think Palin is trying to put forth a united front and people that dismiss Paul will lose.

And whether you like him or not, he knows how to corral supporters to his cause. Palin and him are good in that respect. :)

Midwestprincesse on January 11, 2012 at 8:12 PM

You should receive an award for being able to contradict yourself so many times in so few paragraphs as that.

So Palin finally emerges as a “Ronulan.” To NO ONE’s surprise.

If one is “corraling” supporters, one is not engaged in unifying them or anyone else, but in segregating people AND REGARDING THEM AS CATTLE or creatures or otherwise, sub-human resources.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

You are nuts. Your head is filled with images of comic supervillians, not reality. Go read about the hysteria surrounding the Soviet and Chinese attainment of nuclear weapons. Over. Hyped. And those were MAJOR powers, with militaries larger than the US and more territory and more people at the time. And yet, nothing happened. Your inane and pathetic fantasies of a nuclear armageddon are so detached from reality I feel like I’m talking to an overexcited 9 year old boy surrounded by his GI Joes.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Cool ALT, I thought it was a striking ? on Allah’s part.

Bmore on January 11, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Do us a favor. Go to the drug store, buy some syringes, go home, and mainline the Paul Kool-aid there. We’re all stocked up on crazy here.

TXUS on January 11, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Informed. Certainly not governed.

And faced with war against an industrial superpower, over how they treated their own people, Jewish or otherwise? Do you really think Morgenthau, or any of the realists, would say: Yes, Mr President, that is a cause worthy of war.

Something tells me you know better.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM

At this point I might normally turn to a discussion of von Clausewitz, but I don’t have the energy.

You are a true believer, however offensive I may find your philosphy and that of Dr. Paul.

Lightspeed on January 11, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM

You presume that no one else can hear the speech if they want to? Why cut and paste a transcript of it if not to harass? That’s the negativity and inconsideration that most of us not among the Ronulans have come to identify WITH you Ronulans — you just never knock first or ask for permission before you go ahead and walk on in.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Well, that’s all a nice kind of spin but what does that kool-aid really taste like? Your candidate, Ron Paul, has said, and repeated, “If I were an Iranian, I’d want a nuke, too.” You people hear what the Iranian leadership says about wiping Israel and the Great Satan (us) off the face of the earth and their announced desire to welcome the twelfth imam, their version of judgment day, and you see all the death they have dealt or financed, since the 80s, here and all over the world, and you wish to ignore what they could really do to us when go nuclear. You’re living Oz or Wonderland or on a Mother Ship somewhere so removed from this land or reality that you cannot be reached. TXUS on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

I am a realist TXUS somthing you need a good dose of…

I am not ignorant of anything…I just think differently and realistically, and I am not driven by the fear-mongering of those who would have us continuously fighting wars for what?

It is you who cannot ‘think’ outside the box you are in and see a different outcome…

Be for real…RP has said if asked by Israel, he would come to their aid…didn’t you know that?

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Was Kissinger right?

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

No.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Do us a favor. Go to the drug store, buy some syringes, go home, and mainline the Paul Kool-aid there. We’re all stocked up on crazy here.

TXUS on January 11, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Funny, TXUS, well said.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Be for real…RP has said if asked by Israel, he would come to their aid…didn’t you know that?

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Paul has said a lot of things and not a lot of it is genuine or sensible, nor reliable. Note he says he’s against “aid” to Israel, but, yeah, he’d ‘come to their aid if asked,’ like, say, return their phone call within the week, what?

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I want YOU to show ME and everyone here what you said was in his speech! You can’t so on yer bike…

It’s people like you who can only throw spagetti up to the ceiling and hope some sticks, when confronted with the reality…you dodge the question.

Go sit down…you are toast…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:54 PM

No.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I guess another hero under the bus, eh?

At any rate, you used Kissinger as an example for why the US should have intervened in Europe (IIRC), yet he didn’t feel the need to intervene in the USSR under the same circumstances.

OK, there’s another question you can answer that I posted above.

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:54 PM

All of this “Jew-hater, Jew-murderer, Herr Doktor Luap Nor and his fawning minions brainless nonsense is making Hot Air look and sound like a Brownshirts’ Blog in reversse. Bizarre!

Such name calling of an American with a long record of public service and a fine son who is a good conservative Senator from Kentucky is crass, demeaning to this site and a grand showing of intellectual shallowness.

Wasn’t this a DeMint thread? Being a Southern Gentleman, I assume he, too, would find the “Jew-hater” comments to be beneath contempt. And in the month of the noble and honorable Robert E. Lee’s birthday, too.

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:53 PM

You are ridiculous in your replies…I won’t waste my time with you any more…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Be for real…RP has said if asked by Israel, he would come to their aid…didn’t you know that?

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Paul has said a lot of things and not a lot of it is genuine or sensible, nor reliable. Note he says he’s against “aid” to Israel, but, yeah, he’d ‘come to their aid if asked,’ like, say, return their phone call within the week, what?

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:53 PM

And how is Paul going to come to anyone’s aid with his seven submarines remaining after he’s done-away with all the rest of the U.S. defense resources? Paul says he wants to reduce the U.S. military hardware to “seven submarines.”

Yeah, he’s going to come to anyone’s aid, alright, right after he sails around the Cape of Good Hope in his rowboat.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM
Horace, I think I know how you would vote on Allah’s hypothetical, but just to make sure. Palin/Paul2012 would you support that ticket? P.S. You get some time you might want to track down liberal4life, could be fun, slippery little rascal that one.

Bmore on January 11, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:53 PM

You are ridiculous in your replies…I won’t waste my time with you any more…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:55 PM

I’m flattered. The Ron Paul Koolaider astute at copy-n-paste thinks my replies are “ridiculous.” I strongly doubt you understand how irrational you actually are.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:57 PM

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Copy and paste and now name-calling. I expect no more from the Ronulans among us.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:58 PM

You are nuts. Your head is filled with images of comic supervillians, not reality. Go read about the hysteria surrounding the Soviet and Chinese attainment of nuclear weapons. Over. Hyped. And those were MAJOR powers, with militaries larger than the US and more territory and more people at the time. And yet, nothing happened. Your inane and pathetic fantasies of a nuclear armageddon are so detached from reality I feel like I’m talking to an overexcited 9 year old boy surrounded by his GI Joes.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Again are you fine with having to bust cites if they get nukes?
Is it that hard to answer? No ones talking about armageddon, the USSR, or China fool.

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM

TXUS on January 11, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Funny, TXUS, well said.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:52 PM

By your using an “Ad Hominem” to thwart my logic; your phrases denotes somthing being used as an argument designed to appeal to the emotions rather than to reason.

You both are unreasonable…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM

He IS a Jew-hater.
You have officially jumped-the-shark.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM

So, I guess I must’ve missed when meathead went Paultard?

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Go sit down…you are toast…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Wow, you’re truly insane. I have yet to ever read anything from a Paul supporter who didn’t lapse into irrational screed such as you are doing here once they perceived a “non compliant” member of the public who questions Ron Paul.

Toast? No, I’m a human being but you’re making a good case for your fascism.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Come on. Why must we invade to stop them?

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Because we are not going to stop them from developing nuclear weapons by bombing them. They have scattered the facilities, put them 100m underground, and we can’t even be sure where all of them are.

And if we bomb them first, they will hit back. Airliners will explode. Acts of terror here and in Israel. They will close the Strait of Hormuz. And the international community will ask the question we all learned on the playground: Who threw the first punch.

And Iran will say that we did.

And they will be right.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:01 PM

You both are unreasonable…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Oh, right, the world is bad and we’re all sub=human pond scum. Right. Such a burden you must carry, holding Ron Paul up as you do, such a burden.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 9:58 PM

You are the only one name calling…along with TXUS…

Pitiful excuses the both of you…can’t win with logic, have to resort to name calling…

I certainly expected more from ones such as yourselves…

At least a decent civilized dialogue…

But no… I am disappointed… but not surprised…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

The poser Conservatives need to step down and support Ron Paul. He is the only one who is serious about cutting government and returning to a Constitutional government.

Decoski on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

You both are unreasonable…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Seven submarines! Ron Paul’s goal for the Department of Defense: seven submarines.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

Was Kissinger right?

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 9:41 PM

No.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Forgot how I’m supposed to respect your opinion more than the most important foreign policy maker of the last half century.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Do you like to resort to calling yourself names?

Oh, I see, you are trying to put words in my mouth eh?

Not gonna work…

If that’s what you choose to think ofr yourself, have at it!

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Many of us think not passing laws is actually a plus.

DrMagnolias on January 11, 2012 at 9:44 PM

What part of big government has ten term congressman Paul rolled back?

This is was of the lamest talking points you Paultards have made.

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:04 PM

So, I guess I must’ve missed when meathead went Paultard?

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:00 PM

It was somewhere around the time that Perry, Gingrich, Huntsman, and Romney became unacceptable and Bachmann dropped out ;) (Hey, I left Santorum in there…). Anyway, I don’t know if I can wear the “Paultard” label as I’m personally hoping for a brokered convention (yeah, yeah… not gonna happen).

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM

And, interesting how a printed transcript of Paul’s NH speech omits the audio screaming he used to deliver it.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:05 PM

This is one…

Damn you, auto-correct!

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Bmore

Of course I would. It would be the GOP ticket. It would have the woman I have supported since August 2008 on top. What’s not to vote for?

And Paul as VP? At his age, he isn’t going to do much as VP. Probably would stir up as much as 71 year old Alban Barkley did under Truman from ’49 to ’53. Big deal. And Paul would be 77 upon becoming VP.

Say…do you have some inside info on secret plans by The Cuda?

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 10:06 PM

The entire Republicrat field sucks. Its true though that Jack Mormon boy and Herr Doktor are running the most competent campaigns. Of course they should they’ve had a lot of experience.

I would love to get behind senile gramps but his truther BS Conspiratarded ramblings and most importantly his dipstick supporters makes it hard to do so. Maybe some of the big government Republicrats will wake up to Herr Doktor’s fiscal message which he’s more or less right on about. Also the republicrat god squad freaks and their religious whack job supporters need to STFU and stop screaming about abortion and jebus nobody wants to hear about that crap and it makes you sound like Islamo-fascists.

Your Mamma loves me on January 11, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Fascist I most certainly am not…

You are ruder than rude…are you sure you’re a conservative?

You sound like such a hate-filled human being…

Saying one is ‘toast’ means ‘done’…

Obviously somthing you cannot comprehend!!

It has nothing to do with being a human being…

You are so funny!!

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:05 PM

He didn’t scream…

Are you ‘done’ yet?

I am…

Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 10:11 PM

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

You misunderstand what Paul is saying. He wants to end the War on Drugs program because it is a failure and thus a huge waste of money and because it is racist. He never said he wants to legalize drugs, but says it is not a federal issue.

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:12 PM

JohnGalt23

It would appear that the Twerp Woman ran out of excruciating personal anecdotes and was presented with questions she couldn’t answer, so she has slipped away. Normal operating procedure.

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 10:12 PM

The poser Conservatives need to step down and support Ron Paul. He is the only one who is serious about cutting government and returning to a Constitutional government.

Decoski on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

I wish I had a nickel for every paultard who has posted this in the last two months on HotAir. I could send my kid to Harvard for four years.

Do these people really believe that they are going to persuade anyone by repeating this tripe, over and over? I realize they’re deluded enough to believe it, but are they really deluded enough to think anyone else will?

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:13 PM

but he’s running against a weaker field

Weaker how? Exactly who is this field missing from 2008 that would have made it stronger in 2012? Have you forgotten that John McCain got the nomination in ’08?

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.

Well then, you obviously haven’t been listening to Paul at all. When the issue of foreign policy has come up this campaign season, the most common phrase has been a variation “we can’t afford this”, “we’re out of money”, “we’re broke”, etc.

Then again, if you’re looking to Meggie Big Mac to form your analysis you’re likely to drop a few turds like this one.

fitzfong on January 11, 2012 at 10:14 PM

You are ridiculous in your replies…I won’t waste my time with you any more…

Scrumpy on January 11, 2012 at 9:55 PM

That you recognize the concept of time, that’s a real good thing. Many individuals in the midst of binging on Kool-Aid, whether of the Obama or Paul varieties, have temporal challenges. Yesterday becomes today and today becomes tomorrow and tomorrow becomes yesterday, and so on. A real clusterfark. They just don’t make Kool-aid like they used to.

TXUS on January 11, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 10:06 PM

No secret plans, Allah just posed it as a what if and no one replied, so I thought I’d ask around a bit. I wasn’t sure you’d see me with Scrumpy’s book signing or whatever the he!! that was he had up thread. Cripes he didn’t even serve hors d’oeuvres and such. Hey what about that liberal4life one, slippery, yes?

Bmore on January 11, 2012 at 10:15 PM

What part of big government has ten term congressman Paul rolled back?

You seem to have absolutely no understanding of politics or how our government works. One congress person can not roll back laws. As POTUS, one person can make a huge difference as we see from what Obama has done to destroy our country. He can just write executive orders and make appointments and start wars (and end them , but the never do).

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:16 PM

You misunderstand what Paul is saying. He wants to end the War on Drugs program because it is a failure and thus a huge waste of money and because it is racist. He never said he wants to legalize drugs, but says it is not a federal issue.

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Sorry, but Paul does believe all drugs should be legalized. Hiding behind the state’s rights argument doesn’t change that.

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM

And faced with war against an industrial superpower, over how they treated their own people, Jewish or otherwise? Do you really think Morgenthau, or any of the realists, would say: Yes, Mr President, that is a cause worthy of war.

Something tells me you know better.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 9:40 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.

I’m just trying to clarify here – you’re actually trying to get people to agree with you, right ?

Good luck with that.

deadrody on January 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Bmore

” Hey what about that liberal4life one, slippery, yes?”

And really stupid, too. A pitiful way to go through life.

Horace on January 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Yeah. Nothing happened.

That whole Cold War thing was just a figment of our imagination…

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM

wish I had a nickel for every paultard who has posted this in the last two months on HotAir. I could send my kid to Harvard for four years.

Do these people really believe that they are going to persuade anyone by repeating this tripe, over and over? I realize they’re deluded enough to believe it, but are they really deluded enough to think anyone else will?

And do you realize how stupid you sound. Using the words paultard, tripe and deluded are going to get you no where. Oh, I guess then something like 25% of the people in this country are deluded…if anyone is deluded it’s idiots like you. You need to go back to school and get educated.

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Because we are not going to stop them from developing nuclear weapons by bombing them. They have scattered the facilities, put them 100m underground, and we can’t even be sure where all of them are.

Why would we bash are heads on bunkers when the power grid is there.

And if we bomb them first, they will hit back. Airliners will explode. Acts of terror here and in Israel. They will close the Strait of Hormuz.

If they the back then we deal with it because we can. If they get a weapon and starting doing these things then what can we do? Bettter to stop it before it gets to that point.

And the international community will ask the question we all learned on the playground: Who threw the first punch.

And Iran will say that we did.

And they will be right.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Im sorry but for the most part I dont care what the international community thinks.

We made a mistake with what we did in Libya, what we didnt do to North Korea and now its a prevent game or the stakes get out of hand.

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 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.

I’m just trying to clarify here – you’re actually trying to get people to agree with you, right ?

Good luck with that.

deadrody on January 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM

In some way, when we get on this forum and only focus on the Holocaust as reason for US military intervention, we minimize the slaughter of millions of other people where the US did not intervene.

MeatHeadinCA on January 11, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Go read about the hysteria surrounding the Soviet and Chinese attainment of nuclear weapons. Over. Hyped. And those were MAJOR powers, with militaries larger than the US and more territory and more people at the time. And yet, nothing happened.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 9:49 PM

M.A.D. You should probably look it up. One place it doesn’t apply – delusional lunatics. Like in Iran.

Apples. Oranges.

Next….

deadrody on January 11, 2012 at 10:21 PM

Seven submarines! Ron Paul’s goal for the Department of Defense: seven submarines.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

Isnt that just boomers?

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 10:21 PM

You seem to have absolutely no understanding of politics or how our government works. One congress person can not roll back laws. As POTUS, one person can make a huge difference as we see from what Obama has done to destroy our country. He can just write executive orders and make appointments and start wars (and end them , but the never do).

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:16 PM

No, you seem to have no defense for your candidate.

How do laws get rolled back, if they don’t start with one person in congress? It would take successful bills in Congress to rein in big government, yet Ron Paul has gotten no such bills passed.

Are you suggesting that RP, as POTUS, would make changes via EO’s, the way Obama has? If not, then how is he going to get his “changes” through Congress?

Seems as if you are the one who doesn’t have an understanding of his government works.

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Horace
She He it just ignores me. I’m thinking its a she though. Just playing hard to get. You struck out too huh?

Bmore on January 11, 2012 at 10:24 PM

Question: Has Jim DeMint listened to Ron Paul? How about those Israeli concentration camps, Jim? How about those border fences diabolically designed to keep us in? How about Paul’s theories regarding ‘undue influence exercised by the Zionist lobby’? How about his views regarding Iran’s justification for development of nuclear weapons? How about Paul’s not-so-veiled support of 9-11 conspiracy theories? How about Paul’s very favorable take on klansman David Duke? How about the newsletters? How about the solicitation letters? How about the fundraising on Stormfront?

If the GOP embraces any or part of the Ron Paul agenda, I’m outta here. What Paul preaches isn’t libertarianism. It’s what Pat ‘Hitler was a great man’ Buchanan calls ‘paleoconservativism’, and what anyone with a rudimentary grasp of American history would immediately recognize as a resurgence of the pre-WWII America Firsters movement–and the same thread binding it together then binds it now: virulent antisemitism and racial bigotry combined with a reverent nostalgia for a constitutionally pure paradise that never was. The America Firsters were closely allied with the German-American Bund, a Nazi front group, just as Ron Paul and his supporters are allied with the Stormfront crowd. That alliance was despicable and seditious then and it’s despicable and seditious now.

Better to be an independent than to be associated with a political party allowing emphatically un-American demagogues like Ron Paul a place at the table. I can’t believe Republican Party leadership is seriously considering embracing this vile little weasel.

As an aside, I recently read President Obama and David Axelrod intend to paint the GOP as a party of extremists. Until a few weeks ago, I wouldn’t think such a strategy could possibly work. Now I’m thinking they just might pull it off.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:26 PM

And do you realize how stupid you sound. Using the words paultard, tripe and deluded are going to get you no where. Oh, I guess then something like 25% of the people in this country are deluded…if anyone is deluded it’s idiots like you. You need to go back to school and get educated.

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Thank you, but I will let the sane conservatives here determine who is educated and who isn’t.

Your inability to see the irony of you calling me an idiot is telling. Very telling, as is your apparent delusion that 25% of Americans support your candidate.

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

Puma for Life on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Because you guys saying that anyone who doesn’t lick Herr Doktors shoes hates the country, the Constitution, Liberty, Freedom; who continually call American service-members fascists and baby-killers and murderers, who think the Twin Towers were actually brought down by the Mossad or the CIA and that the planes were imaged using holograms and lasers, that fire doesn’t melt steel, that the Islamists aren’t responsible for their actions – we are…etc

Is just the height of reasoned and rational conversation.

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

Yeah. Nothing happened.

That whole Cold War thing was just a figment of our imagination…

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM

My bad, I just went back through my books. How could I forget the time the Soviets nuked the East Coast? Or when China nuked San Francisco? You know, just how every sky-is-falling fearmonger back then said they most definitely would. But THIS time, its totally credible that Iran is going to sneak in and randomly nuke 10 American malls or whatever your fellow chicken-little was panicking about.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

Why do you hate Liberty?

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 10:30 PM

But THIS time, its totally credible that Iran is going to sneak in and randomly nuke 10 American malls or whatever your fellow chicken-little was panicking about.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

Didnt say that but go ahead and now start lying, after all thats what comes after being insulting. Whats the next step to avoid answering the question?

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 10:31 PM

I would love to vote for Ron Paul but his stunning lack of understanding the reality of geopolitics is simply too dangerous for the future of our great country.

Ellis on January 11, 2012 at 10:31 PM

M.A.D. You should probably look it up. One place it doesn’t apply – delusional lunatics. Like in Iran.

Apples. Oranges.

Next….

deadrody on January 11, 2012 at 10:21 PM

You know who else was proclaimed far and wide to be “delusional lunatics”? The Soviets. And Mao’s China. Have you prepared a fallout shelter yet? Back then people were so scared of delusional lunatic commie nuke strikes that homemade fallout shelters became quite popular. Put your money where your mouth is. Make a shelter, since those big scary Iranaians terrify you so much. If you don’t, then you believe what you are saying less than those 50s and 60s fools believed the Soviets would suddenly rain down nuclear armageddon. Apples and apples. Next.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 10:33 PM

promachus on January 11, 2012 at 8:06 PM

and now we have Romney parroting Paln on crony Capitalism.

idesign on January 11, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Right after everyone — includes Palin — parroted Paul Ryan from 2009:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/11/business-government-politics-reform-opinions-contributors-paul-ryan.html

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:35 PM

…whenever I read or watch interviews with his most devoted supporters, foreign policy seems to come up much more often.

You can’t really separate spending from militarism.

angelat0763 on January 11, 2012 at 10:36 PM

My bad, I just went back through my books. How could I forget the time the Soviets nuked the East Coast? Or when China nuked San Francisco? You know, just how every sky-is-falling fearmonger back then said they most definitely would. But THIS time, its totally credible that Iran is going to sneak in and randomly nuke 10 American malls or whatever your fellow chicken-little was panicking about.

Daikokuco on January 11, 2012 at 10:27 PM

No, no sky-is-falling fearmonger said the Soviets or Chinese would definitely nuke wherever, USA. What was said then is still true today: if we maintain a defense capable of inflicting mortal damage to any potential adversary, then we would be safe, and we were.

You’re an idiot and, I’m just guessing here, a Ron Paul supporter, too. Same thing.

troyriser_gopftw on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

I come in here and read all the anger and name calling and it’s obvious that the GOP is doomed. If you neoconservatives think you can continue bashing Paul and his supporters (many of whom have voted Republican for many decades) and win in the Fall… then you are in for a rude awakening.

Paul is polling at over 10% nationally now. Most of those people WILL NOT

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Seven submarines! Ron Paul’s goal for the Department of Defense: seven submarines.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:03 PM

Isnt that just boomers?

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 10:21 PM

Nuclear submarines or not, that declaration of goal by Paul just serves to emphasize how irrational he actually is. His understanding of so many aspects of our complicated world today are those of a simpleton. I do think he’s not mentally well.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:39 PM

I come in here and read all the anger and name calling and it’s obvious that the GOP is doomed. If you neoconservatives think you can continue bashing Paul and his supporters (many of whom have voted Republican for many decades) and win in the Fall… then you are in for a rude awakening.

Paul is polling at over 10% nationally now. Most of those people WILL NOT

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Let’s forget the fact you begin by chastising people for name-calling and then proceed to do the same damn thing.

Herr Doktor is polling at over 10% nationally?

He’s a shoe in…

catmman on January 11, 2012 at 10:41 PM

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Your handle tells us all we need to know about you.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 11, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Why would we bash are heads on bunkers when the power grid is there.

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.

If they the back then we deal with it because we can. If they get a weapon and starting doing these things then what can we do? Bettter to stop it before it gets to that point.

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

Im sorry but for the most part I dont care what the international community thinks.

Can’t say I blame you for feeling that way, but in matters of war and peace, it really does matter. Just an example… if the int’l community ain’t with us, how effective do you think sanctions will be? If the rest of the world thinks we started a war with Iran, they will start trading openly with them again.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Do these people really believe that they are going to persuade anyone by repeating this tripe, over and over? I realize they’re deluded enough to believe it, but are they really deluded enough to think anyone else will?

JannyMae on January 11, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Based on his performance in the current election cycle, as well as the visible increase in support in these forums, I’d say their techniques are apparently at least somewhat effective.

angelat0763 on January 11, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Nuclear submarines or not, that declaration of goal by Paul just serves to emphasize how irrational he actually is. His understanding of so many aspects of our complicated world today are those of a simpleton. I do think he’s not mentally well.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:39 PM

If that number is just boomers then its not that big of a deal. If that includes attack subs then its time to break out the butterfly net.

Sultanofsham on January 11, 2012 at 10:44 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

The innocence, and ignorance, of youth.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:44 PM

I come in here and read all the anger and name calling and it’s obvious that the GOP is doomed. If you neoconservatives think you can continue bashing Paul and his supporters (many of whom have voted Republican for many decades) and win in the Fall… then you are in for a rude awakening.

Paul is polling at over 10% nationally now. Most of those people WILL NOT

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Hey Dude. You watch just how fast ALL of these people will congeal around the nominee. It will make your head spin (slowly).

WryTrvllr on January 11, 2012 at 10:45 PM

This was suggested earlier, but I really think that Romney putting Rand Paul on the ticket as his running mate could solve a lot of these problems. I think the Ron Paul people could pull the lever for Romney if Rand is in the VP slot. And Rand is far less loony on foreign policy than his father. Plus it gives Mitt some degree of Tea Party and libertarian credibility. It could also help dispel the possibility of conservatives staying home on election day.

And Rand is a better speaker, better debater, and less of a loose cannon than his father as well.

Plus he could hopefully push Mitt to the right a little bit…

doug1981 on January 11, 2012 at 10:46 PM

I come in here and read all the anger and name calling and it’s obvious that the GOP is doomed. If you neoconservatives think you can continue bashing Paul and his supporters (many of whom have voted Republican for many decades) and win in the Fall… then you are in for a rude awakening.

Paul is polling at over 10% nationally now. Most of those people WILL NOT

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Let’s look at this “support” for Ron Paul in purely practical terms: the man is nearing EIGHTY YEARS OLD — he’s asking for an office that would put him on the job in January 2013, next year, so he’d be even closer to eighty by then. Four years later, he’s 84 and there shouldn’t be an expectation of a man of that age being more fit then than he is now (quite the contrary). His functional abilities now are the best you’re going to see from the guy, and, I’d say they’re not great when compared with a man and his mind who is thirty or even twenty years his junior (the other candidates, for starters).

While age and physical (and mental acuity) functions are not the sole basis of electabiliity, the capacity to respond (to function competitively) is a very significant aspect of hiring anyone to handle anything. Paul on his age and functional abilities alone are already observably degenerated when compared with someone a few decades younger (as in, other candidates).

AND, another aspect about his “support” is that it includes people from the Left who are both “trying to make a statement” and those on the FarLeft/FarRight combined (Libertarians, generally, who are more Left than Right in many cases) who want to create some sort of political havoc-statement in preference to actually doing practical work (as in, actually working to elect someone viable to the job).

I’ve read a great deal of internet commenting from people who think — as they stated last election in support of McCain — that support for Paul “makes” some sort of damaging dent to the GOP so they think that’s a good thing. Combine that sentiment with the Left who inevitably infiltrates GOP elections as they formulate (using the same rationale, if it can be called that, as that used by some Libertarians I just described)…as they formulate their manipulation of the GOP election/s (to the benefit of the Left), and you get people like Paul with supporters.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:47 PM

I come in here and read all the anger and name calling and it’s obvious that the GOP is doomed. If you neoconservatives think you can continue bashing Paul and his supporters (many of whom have voted Republican for many decades) and win in the Fall… then you are in for a rude awakening.

Paul is polling at over 10% nationally now. His supporters WILL NOT vote for NewtRomneyGinrich. They are finished with supporting the endless wars and nation building that the neoconservatives push for.

If the GOP continues to follow the neoconservatives then it will break apart and we’ll see new parties form. It is that simple.

If you doubt this then you probably missed the fact that in a matchup of Obama, Romney, and Gary Johnson (Conservative two term Republican Governor running as a libertarian) … Obama won by a landslide and Johnson got 9%.

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:48 PM

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM

And, Paul has been in Congress for several decades. All those problems he claims beset our federal government, Paul’s contributed to or else he’s been incompetent to change all these past decades. Either way, he’s part of the problem.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:48 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
The innocence, and ignorance, of youth.

JohnGalt23 on January 11, 2012 at 10:44 PM

Ummm…. Does anyone remember what happened to the plane load of chinese nuclear scientists enroute back to china (after the russian-chinese fallout circa 1955, under Stalin)???? Careful what you wish for.

WryTrvllr on January 11, 2012 at 10:49 PM

If you neoconservatives think you can continue bashing Paul and his supporters (many of whom have voted Republican for many decades) and win in the Fall… then you are in for a rude awakening.

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:37 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

RP 2012!!!

air_up_there on January 11, 2012 at 10:50 PM

If the GOP continues to follow the neoconservatives then it will break apart and we’ll see new parties form. It is that simple.

If you doubt this then you probably missed the fact that in a matchup of Obama, Romney, and Gary Johnson (Conservative two term Republican Governor running as a libertarian) … Obama won by a landslide and Johnson got 9%.

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:48 PM

So, why, then, don’t you Libertarians ever gain national support in elections? Paul ran as the party affiliation he actually is, as a Libertarian, and he lost, so he reregistered as Republican — a party he seems mostly to dislike — and won a House seat.

So why can’t you Libertarians ever win elections all on your own? Instead, you balast elections with the 10% drag on both parties, “just to make a point”.

Funny thing is that whatever “point” you’re assuming is being made is never one that benefits the nation.

And I think the legalize-drugs movement is mostly responsible for Paul’s “10%”.

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:51 PM

’ve read a great deal of internet commenting from people who think — as they stated last election in support of McCain — that support for Paul “makes” some sort of damaging dent to the GOP so they think that’s a good thing. Combine that sentiment with the Left who inevitably infiltrates GOP elections as they formulate (using the same rationale, if it can be called that, as that used by some Libertarians I just described)…as they formulate their manipulation of the GOP election/s (to the benefit of the Left), and you get people like Paul with supporters.

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

If the GOP continues to follow the neoconservatives then it will break apart and we’ll see new parties form. It is that simple.

(…)

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2012 at 10:48 PM

“Neoconservatives,” “Bush Conservatives,” yadda, yadda, yadda. Vanilla, plaid, pastels…

Lourdes on January 11, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4