Posted on 01/04/2012 1:16:42 PM PST by La Enchiladita
Half of those "20-plus percent" of the "voting public" that voted for Paul would vote for Kookcinich in the Democrat Primary, too.
The infiltration of Lefty's in the Paulbots is rampant, and those who are "aged Hippies" follow The Ralien. He has no clue on Foreign Policy, Defense, or personal responsibility. Legalizing pot, and other drugs, is NOT Presidential OR Conservative, IMHO.
While I am no fan of Sarah Palin, she is right on this one... but for different reasons: The Reagan Coalition had the support of those who are civil-libertarian minded. He sprung from the Goldwater wing of the Republican Party, which, while not the same as Libertarianism, is very palatable to Libertarians. And thereby, Goldwater Libertarians are a necessary component of Conservatism.
I have said here before that civil-libertarianism and the Judeo-Christian ethic are what should inform the conscience of every conservative: Libertarianism without the Judeo-Christian ethic will inevitably wind up in anarchy... and The Judeo-Christian ethic without civil-libertarianism will inevitably slide into Christian Socialism.
While I am no Paul fan either, I can see what our civil-libertarian minded FRiends see in him. The difference between Reagan Conservatism and Neo-conservatism is basically the lack of civil-libertarianism.
Sarah Palin has made numerous admiring statements about Wrong Paul, over the past two years, to my knowledge.
I heard Ed Rollins say the same thing a few times last night and this morning.
im not just jumpin with joy, but paul is better than the other clowns we have. i wished palin would have ran, i would have been one of her biggest supporters, but shes not and i just think paul is more honest that the other rino scumbags. Milt, newt, perry, rick, are liberal rinos and there record shows it..
I think Palin is assuming that Paul supporters are Republican, this is where I disagree with her. Paul supporters are mostly Dems who are voting for him because they know if he is the nominee Obama wins in a landslide. Alienating Paul supporters doesnt bother me at all, since they are all a bunch of anti Semites anyway. I could give a rats behind what they think
Geez, Marty. You just can't help it, can you?
Sarah specifically highlighted her agreement with Paul's supporters with regard to fiscal issues. She didn't say that she agreed with anything else.
And you respond by accusing her with a racist smear? Do you not recognize the distinction? Or do you just not care and can't wait to fire with both barrels without even looking at your target?
Thank you. Are they not the most obnoxious inhabitants of the internet?
I can't wait until we get past caucuses -- at which the rabid Paulbots excel in spamming --- and to some real in-the-booth primary voting.
So because Americans are war-weary, we need a candidate that sucks up to Iranian tyrants and those that want to befriend them? Don’t think so.
My understanding is that Rue Paul adds all sorts of earmarks to legislation, then votes against the bill giving plausible denialability. Quite the hypocrite.
You have learned well from watching the past 6 months of republican debates. Mis-state your opponents position then attack it. Ad-hominem works good too.
“As I see it, a lot of Ron Paul “supporters” are actually Obama supporters trying to sew seeds of diversion and division.”
You see it wrong.
Too bad you aren’t bright enough to figure out that Ron Paul runs for no other reason than to help elect the GOP beltway choice again and again and again.
He’s an intentional spoiler.
Just for you
I heard her on FOX at the first of the week shilling for Paul.
I excused that as trying to be “fair and balance”
But now she seems to have jumped the shark.
Even PAUL says he doesn’t see himself in the oval office.
Does he plan on working out of the Stormfront offices?
FISCAL policies. WHAT fiscal policies.
He’s going to cut a couple of trillion the first year. And just how does he plan on doing that?
disband the military. While ending any and all social programs. Maybe nationalize the oil industry. That’s what all Libertarian Communist think solves problems.
Pree-cisely. I have seen the R. Paul supporters and they are the Birkenstock crowd, who have -— btw -— been in evidence at “Occupy” events.
Just remember this, if we do not cut the budget by at least a trillion a year, right now, we will not be able to afford an aggressive foreign policy.
Paul has indeed defended earmarks, and has even advocated expansion of them. I'm not quite sure of his rationale for it.
But at least in today's environment, it's irresponsible. One analogy that I read long ago was that being elected to Congress was like being given an American Express Card.
You could spend as much or as little as you wanted, but you only had to pay 1/435th of the bill.
If you spent extravagantly, you only paid 1/435th of the bill. If you spent nothing at all, you still paid 1/435th of the bill.
It's a big simplification, but it's a good way to demonstrate how it doesn't encourage fiscal responsibility.
Yes, and don’t forget Dr. Paul’s recent stated desire to enjoin the Taliban in kumbaya fashion. I would call that going beyond “war weariness.”
well, who are you supporting?- im all ears and willing to listen to you.. all i can tell you is that i wont support Milt at all, ( mabe newt)..
I have no "opponent" in the race, nor do I have a favorite.
Ron Paul is a nutcase, followed by nutcases, and followed by Democrats who vote Democrat, but show up to egg him on.
Peaceniks and old Hippies make up the bulk of his voterbase, and if you THINK he's Presidential material, seek professional help.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.