Posted on 12/06/2011 9:24:46 AM PST by Absolutely Nobama
There are many reasons to think Ron Paul is a bottom feeder. He refuses to support a Constitutional amendment to protect normal, heterosexual marriage. He voted to turn the United States military into a San Francisco bath house by repealing DADT. He wants to see drugs and prostitution legalized. He thinks Islamo-Nazi Iran should have a nuclear weapon. He surrounds himself with lunatics like Cindy Sheehan's love slave, Screwy Lewy Rockwell. In general, there isn't a sewer RuPaul (H/T: Mark Levin) isn't too proud to hunt for food in.
Then, there's this. From CBS News:
***********************************
"Libertarian Congressman Ron Paul is breaking with many of his fellow Republicans - among them his son Rand - to support the creation of the planned Islamic cultural center near the former site of the World Trade Center that has come to be known as the 'ground zero mosque.'
In a statement decrying 'demagogy' around the issue, the former Republican presidential candidate wrote late last week that "the debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.'
'Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be 'sensitive' requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from 'ground zero,' Paul continues.
He goes on to argue that 'the neo-conservatives' who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia...never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014453-503544.html
************************************
Yes, I know this is old news. No, I'm not breaking any new ground here. However, since Ol' Ru is running for President, this crap should be revisited. (Even Howard "YEAAAAAAAAH!" Dean thought this was a bad idea.)
I don't want to get involved in the technical legalities about whether or not this House of Hatred should or should not be built, since the developers don't seem to have the money for Lincoln Logs, let alone building a gazillion dollar insult. That was beaten to death last year and I don't feel like rehashing it. What I want to focus on is RuPaul's detestable attitude on the matter. (Which is eerirly similiar to Chariman Obama's and Nazi Pelosi's detestable attitude on the matter.)
The above snippet shows, once again, that RuPaul is NOT a Conservative, regardless of what his drug addict followers claim. He's basically an anarchist, and this little episode proves it.
Now, before we get started, I think it's appropriate to explain what I mean by anarchist. I'm not talking in this sense of a bomb-thowing V For Vendetta type. I'm talking about someone who believes they have the right to do what they please when they feel like doing it. That's what RuPaul is advocating here. This has nothing to do with "neo-conservative" war mongering or the religious rights of Muslims. (This is a bare-bones explanation of RuPaul's mentor Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism, which basically states that society should allow individuals to do as they please as long as they can afford to do so.)
A Conservative doesn't believe in any of the above nonsense. A Conservative is a staunch defender of the individual and his rights, but the Conservative also believes in common sense and morality. For example, a Conservative would defend a bar owner's right to allow smoking in his bar, but a Conservative would fight tooth and nail to stop a strip club from opening next to an elementary school or a church. The Conservative fights for limited government, but never for anarchy. The Conservative also believes that while the individual has rights and those rights should be defended at all costs, the individual should use those rights in a responsible manner. In other words, the Conserative may very well want to give the social finger to the driver of a Smart Car with a "Obama 2012" bumper sticker, but he doesn't because he believes in a polite moral society.
Ladies and gentlemen, yes there's a fine line that often gets blurred when it comes to our rights, and I don't claim to have all the answers. But I will tell you this, I sure do understand our rights better than Ron Paul does.
“It’s like meth addiction for you.”
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”
Barry Goldwater, 1964
I’ll stop when RuPaul loses and becomes a meaningless footnote in American history like his buddies Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader.
I’m not giving in. This is my party, not his. I’d rather swim in a shark infested pool wearing a hamburger bathing suit than let Ron Paul destroy what’s left of the Republican party with his support of Islamists, the extra-Constitutional and evil homosexual agenda, his desire to turn the US into a cesspool with his desire to legalize drugs and prostitution, and the rest of his moonbattery.
Unhappy ?
Call our complaint line at 1-800-NON-PAUL. There, one of our repesentatives will be happy to completely ignore your nebulous complaint while silently mocking you to a co-worker.
Conservatism 101:
The Conservative understands that the United States of America was founded on Judeo-Christian values and morals. It was NOT founded on secular humanist values.
THIS MEANS:
-—A Conservative fights against the homosexual agenda.
-—A Conservative fights against legalizing drugs and prostitution.
-—A Conservative fights against abortion.
For the gazillionth time on this thread:
FREE REPUBLIC IS A CONSERVATIVE SITE! IT’S NOT A LIBERALTARIAN SITE!
If you’re unwilling to vote for a Conservative Republican, (and I’ll grant you that they’re an endangered species), you’re part of the problem, not the solution.
Thank you! It’s greatly appreciated.
It’s crunch time! This is OUR party! Just like I’m not surrendering to Tokyo Rove’s RINO herd, I’m not surrendering to Screwy Lewy Rockwell’s AINO herd. (Americans In Name Only)
NO COMPROMISE! NO RETREAT! NO SURRENDER!
Still sensitive over that pasting I gave you on the other thread?
What pasting ? If I remember correctly, everyone mocked YOU not me, paleocon.
I have no desire whatsoever to get in a flame war with you. Quite frankly, it’s a waste of my precious time on God’s green and cooling earth.
What were your complaints about what I wrote, exactly ?
But writing maniacal rants promoting the defeat of a man who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of becoming President is a good use of your precious time? Your anti-Paul crusade has to be personal, yes?
It sure is. I have no desire whatsoever to allow that pig to disgrace the Republican party with his pushing of the homosexual agenda, Islam, the legalization of drugs, the legalization of prostitution, OWS, and antisemitism.
If you don’t like it, too bad.
No, it's fine with me, and it's certainly your right, and I admire your passion about the subject. I just find it peculiar, that's all, for I haven't seen this much sturm undt drang expended on a dead-on-arrival political candidate in a long time.
Who are you for by the by? It's getting down to crunch time, especially with Cain gone. Are you for anyone, or just against Paul?
State "rights" trump individual rights! State "rights" trump individual rights!
Bachmann, if she’s still in the race by the time I get to vote in Florida. If she’s not, I’ll vote for Gingrich (with a great deal of reservation.)
Now of course, if lightning struck were to strike twice in the same spot, and it came down to it, I’d close my eyes and vote for RuPaul over Romney the Commie and Chairman Obama. If that were to happen, I’d be planning for 2016 the moment I left the polling place.
Ignore HG and he’ll go away.
He was upset that I knocked Ernest Hemingway once, spent several days writhing in anguish over it.
Huh?
Don't get so full of yourself. Hemingway was often a great writer. But most of the time, if not all of the time, he was a lousy drunk, an awful father, a frightful husband, a terrible friend, a self-aggrandizer, and a political rube. Knock him all you want, sugar. I could care less.
Well best of luck to you that you get to vote for your candidate. But I think you're probably well aware she has less of a chance of winning than Rep. Paul.
Maybe your precious time would be better spent promoting Bachmann than tearing down Paul? Just a thought.
LOL.
Hemingway was an awful wirter as anyone who suffered through The Old Man And The Sea can attest.
He also died a selfish coward death by self inflicted shotgun lobotomy, leaving his family to clean up his mess.
And yes, you did writhe over that statement for about three days.
In the meantime, since you came into this thread to add nothing to it and with nothing to say, what do you think of RonPaul supporting homosexuals and their agenda?
Taste is subjective. Anyone who thinks he or she can argue taste objectively is a moron. Take your screen name, for example. You chose one that sounds like a gay Dungeons and Dragons character. You may love it, but others might find it a bit squishy. Who's right? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I don't care a whit about the homos. I have better things to do than fret about gay people.
Well, Ron Paul supports homos.
And if you support Ron Paul, well.
You then are supporting the homo agenda.
He is no conservative, not even close.
Try again, you fail.
F- on your grade.
But at least he’d support your screen name.
I should remember OWK, I was here then, fighting faggotry as usual...
Darn memory!
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.