Click the Pic
The 44th Day of the FReepathon?
Sheesh!! End It Now!
Donate today
Posted on 08/13/2011 10:01:23 AM PDT by chatter4
Great video, well worth hearing. Ron Paul's remarks about Iran, followed by commentaries of Levin, Rush and Beck all in one place.
Rational debate to paulbots = spamming every forum they can find with a bunch conspiratorial nonsense.
Come on guys, at least stay off the sporting, gaming and weather forums. Nothing worse than going to forums to follow the news on the NFL training camps or a newly forming tropical depression and having to sort through a bunch of paulspam.
Yeah, well, it seems the conservatives don't belong there either, if the Republican voting record is any indication.
Actually, it's a Republican forum. Conservatives don't favor big government.
Actually, it's a Republican forum. Conservatives don't favor big government.
But there are some here who realize it, and in fact push the neocon Kool-aid.
How the neocons shills come suddenly crawling out of the woodwork making frenzied attempts to marginalize Ron Paul at the very mention of his name!
Their overreaction reminds me of something Winston Churchill once said:
"They are afraid of words and thoughts! Words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home, all the more powerful because they are forbidden. These terrify them. A little mouse – a little tiny mouse! – of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic."
Come to think of it, Winston Churchill was also marginalized between WWI and WWII, and his constant warnings about the growing danger of Germany only invited ridicule from his contemporaries.
But as England and the world soon found out--Churchill was right.
And Ron Paul is right.
brilliant post!!!
while some of RP’s economics points may be valid,
he clearly has no understanding of Islam whatsoever!
Ron Paul is the most Conservative candidate in the field at the moment. He is actually FOR small govt, he doesn’t just talk the talk about it.
Palin is my first choice, Paul is my second.
Most will, and you know it. Just read the Ron Paul forums. These people have absolutely no use for any of the Republicans who may actually win the GOP nomination. And Paul's strongest base of support is college kids (and perhaps young techie types) who are focused mostly on his social libertarian agenda - drug legalization and isolationist/peacenik policies. I would suggest that the overwhelming vast majority of these kids will AGAIN end up voting for Obama as the lesser of 2 evils between the Republican and Democratic party. Oh sure, the people who truly understand what Ron Paul represents won't vote for Obama, but they'll end up voting for the Libertarian candidate.
Libertarianism is an important component of the Republican party and is the source of a great many ideas (some good, some not) and energy (some good, some not.)
I really want to agree with you here, but I ask you this - if Ron Paul is supposed to be a Republican yet won't even endorse the eventual nominee of his own party, what good is he? What good is he to Republicans if the supporters he supposedly brings simply bail the minute he loses the nomination? What good is he if his supporters won't even likely vote for Republicans downballot because they can't vote for socially conservative candidates?
Everyone knows Paul is simply using the Republican party label because no one would even pay attention to him if he ran as the Libertarian he truly is. I don't mind candidates having a libertarian streak, but Ron Paul isn't a conservative with some libertarian views, he is a straight up Libertarian candidate dishonestly using the GOP label.
This is the age of the death of reason.
I see my post has struck a tender nerve.
If you want more of the same, keep voting for mainstream candidates.
I see your postings remain substance free.
Second point: Cato, Reason, and other outlets are important sources for ideas in the Republican Party, so singling Ron Paul out as the sole focus -- or even the main source -- of libertarian influences on the Republican Party is silly. There are conservatives who are not religious conservatives, and to the surprise of many on FRee Republic, they represent about 1/3 of conservatives in the country. Many are still socially conservative, but aren't religious, but many are sympathetic to libertarian ideas.
More on this second point: Surely you jest if you think Ron Paul is the only Republican with this problem. I would like to draw your attention to the number of so-called Republicans, and even in a few cases a few so-called "conservatives" who would not only not endorse the Party's candidate in 2008, but who actually endorsed Barack 0bama!
However flawed Christine O'Donnell may have been as a candidate (and I am stipulating to this for the sake of advancing the discussion, because I do not personally think she was particularly flawed) Castle had an obligation to endorse her once he was defeated in the primary. He did not. He is not unique in this regard. ALL of GWB's minions trashed her. Is Karl Rove then not a Republican? Again, FReepers might not adore him as they once did, but he is a Republican still.
Conservatives -- in a conservative party -- are constantly called up to fall in line and support the "moderate." Yet, it is typically the case that when the RINO loses, he jumps ship and trashes the very people whose efforts made his candidacy possible in the first place. IN NY 23 Scozzafava threw in with the Leftist Party after accepting nearly a million dollars in campaign money from the GOP.
So, please.
Politics makes for strange bedfellows, and I'll repeat my statement in light of these remarks: you may regard him as a stalking horse for the Libertarian Party, but the truth is that Paul is a better Republican than just about any "Republican" east of the Hudson River, or west of the Sierras.
I wish that were not true. But it is.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
What they should do is have a theme to the debates, say for instance, the Budget or foreign policy.
And let each candidate speak 10 minutes on the subject.
Then the MSM can ask particular questions on the subject.
Obeying the Consitution-what a radical notion!
The fact is the US can’t stop it-we are not omnipotent.
In the 20th Century, the Republicans had just three -- three[!] conservative nominees. Two of them: Coolidge (who was not a movement conservative because he predates conservatism in that sense) and Reagan, were great Presidents. Goldwater was defeated by a viciously dishonest campaign by a man who did more damage than anyone since FDR.
The mantra should be: if you want change to happen, don't vote for candidates who aren't conservatives.
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.