Posted on 05/16/2011 3:16:29 PM PDT by ChocChipCookie
Pretend, if you will, that somehow Ron Paul has won the Republican nomination for President. Who on earth would he choose as his running mate? He's such a lone ranger and so out-there with a lot of his views that I can't think of a compatible VP candidate. What say you?
Campaign slogan: "Duh... Winning."
The pervert Paul pretends to care about the Constitution to try and hide his anti-military, anti-Israel, pro-Islamist terrorist agenda. He proved this beyond a shadow of a doubt when he voted to homosexualize the military claiming that homosexuality and heterosexulity needed to be treated equally. The Founders would have nothing to do with a pervert like Ron Paul.
Based upon Paul’s views I would guess that Ru Paul would make a good running mate for Ron to make for the perfect pervert ticket.
If he wins, almost every Republican member of the Congress or Senate and every Governor will lobby hard to become his VP candidate.
The fact that Rep. Paul opposes our military involvement in 135 countries around the world does not make him anti-military. He actually favors a strong and vastly superior SELF DEFENSE!
As for the repeal of DODT I disagree with him strongly on that issue and am disappointed that he voted for it.
You should be more then just simply disappointed in the anti-Constitutional position of Ron Paul in homosexualizing the military, it should tell you something about how he is a phony when it comes to the Constiution.
And his overall stance on foreign policy is aligned with radical leftists like Code Pink and the DailyKos. Ron Paul believes in Iran’s right to have nuclear weapons even. He is a blame-America leftist, imo, but spins things to hide that fact. He even came out in support of seeing a Victory mosque built at Ground Zero. Paul is a loser.
And you say he favors SELF DEFENSE! Wow! So I guess you are one those who believe that we went into Iraq for oil? Are you a Saddam defender?
Ron Paul is an idiot and FR isn't called "the freep" except by Ron Paul supporters.
And idiots, but that is redundant.
Lol you mad bro?
I do happen to despise the type of scum (like Paul) who side with and give moral support to our enemies.
At least in the case of groups like Code Pink and International A.N.S.W.E.R their anti-American agenda is out in the open for all to see but with Ron Paul he trys to disguise it by distorting history and America’s Founding. Paul is a pervert.
So where you out there on the streets holding signs to defend Saddam Hussein?
Ron Paul is a nut wack job. Where in ‘Winning The Future’ are you coming from?
He is a nut get over it!
¿ʇnoqɐ buıʞןɐʇ noʎ ǝɹɐ ʇɐɥʍ
No, Paul actually knows very little about the Constitution. Hence his ignorant comments about such matters as treaty powers, war powers, drug trafficking enforcement, letters of marque, “states rights” etc. Not to mention his embrace of Constitution-hater Lysander Spooner.
LBJ wasn’t exactly a “compatible” candidate with JFK, but took the position anyway since he knew it was a potential stepping-stone to the presidency. Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Ford and GHWB all became POTUS after first serving as Veep. True, Humphrey, Mondale and Gore were Veeps who failed in their presidential bids, but 5 to 3 odds is nothing to sneer at, especially to someone relatively young who can use the position to buff their credentials (get more executive experience, if that’s lacking: see Al Gore; get more foreign policy experience: see Richard Nixon) and is willing to wait in the wings.
Unless you’re a complete bozo like Joe Biden, there’s few downsides to serving as Veep in terms of improving your chances of becoming president.
“Even most Paul haters on the freep would agree that he knows quite a bit about the constitution. Its his interpretation of it that is contreversial.”
Dude! (I only said that so you could understand me).
Run back over to the Huffington Post. Lots more folks there support ‘Dr. Paul’ then they do here.
Dude! That might be because he is a freakin’ liberal.
‘Dr. Paul’ knows about as much about the constitution as a third grader.
‘Dr. Paul’s’ interpation:
1.) Always run from your enimies.
2.) Always blame the USA for ANY problem in the world.
3.) Hang out with Alex Jones- because he KNOWS all about the constitution.
4.) Ban the U.S Military. (Them freakin’ war mongers’)
5.) Join with your bubbies at the NY Times and abandon Israel. Always support the Arab Pov.
6.) Loudly proclaim to all Pot Heads and drug user’s that the U.S. has no authority to outlaw drugs. Claim heroine is a ‘legal’ vice.
7.) Claim that taxes are illegal.
8.) Propose crazy bills in congress, then vote against them, so you can “be above this “nuttiness”.
9.) After mustering 1.5% of the GOP vote in the last primary, have your Nazi, Goosestep supporters claim “he won ALL the debates”. (Extra credit if you can hit any talking head from FNC with a snowcone).
10,) Pretend that you have no personal ambition at all. It’s ALL about the constitution!
11.) Claim that U.S citizens have no right to be protected by law enforcement. That would cost money not ‘set out’ in the constitution.
12.) Claim GWB is ‘behind’ 911. (See Alex Jones above.)
13.) ALWAYS side with liberals on foriegn policy. ALWAYS!
14.) Act in the least possible way ‘Presidential’. In fact act nuttier than crap. That will always attract more support.
Dude! If you can not figure it out. Then I dought anyone here can explain to you why ‘Dr. Paul’ is not held in- let’s say- such high regard here.
Once again, there is always the Huffington Post.
And happy toking.
What a very lovely screed. The ad hominom attacks were the best part imo. Also, your use of “dude” as a reference to my supposed drug use was especially “high”larious.
You may be right that Paul supporters don’t have a home here. But it says at the top of the page that this is a site for constitutional conservatives.
Exactly what about the Federal government is constitutional these days?
Which candidate (rember Sarah is not a candidate) do you think bests represents a strictly constituional approach to government?
Also, which of the three wars we are in are constitutional?
Would you call yoursefl a conservative or a neo-con, or perhaps a neo-colonialist?
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.