UNITE THE CLANS! One DAY after announcing, Ron Paul already leads over Hunter and Tancredo.

World Net Daily & PollingReport.Com ^

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Here's a good timeline, with sources.

http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3290

[No Truce With Kings]

Ron Paul is a cheese-eating surrender monkey when it come to the War on Terror.

None of what Paul supports will matter a whit if the Islamofascists win. They will impose their taxes, their law and their religion on us -- and nothing Ron Paul says will change that.

If you want to join the Ron Paul lemming-run to dhimmitude be my guest -- but don't expect any support from me or mine. We can fix what's wrong with this country once the Islamofascists are beaten and we won't have a country to fix if they win.

[jveritas]

I debated whether I respond intellectually at what you posted or laugh at you. I chose the latter because it is an insult to my brain to respond intellectually.

[Austin Willard Wright]

We disagree. Actually, Paul is an extremely effective team player on specific issues. Because he uses principle, rather than knee jerk partisanship, as his guide, he has become adept at working with such diverse colleages as hard-core conservatives and flaming liberals on a wide range of issues. For this reason, he has won the respect of many people on both sides of the aisle who know where he stands and respect him. If anyone had the ability to cross the ideological divide and "work with your other people" it is Paul.

[AuntB]

See post #35.

[jveritas]

Absolutely wonderful, Ron Paul polling at a powerful 2% of the votes! I think we should all have a group mental orgasm. (sarcasm beyond belief).

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I don't agree with him 100%, but he's more acceptable to me than the liberal Republican three stooges that the MSM is trying to ram down our throats. Hunter would be OK too.

Hunter's my third choice... Tom Tancredo is my second choice, as he is FAR superior on Fiscal Conservatism (in National Taxpayer Union ratings, Ron Paul has ranked from #1 to #3 in all of Congress, whereas Tancredo has ranked #4 to #13 -- still pretty darn good out of 435 congresscritters! Hunter is usually amongst the worst of the Republicans in terms of Fiscal Conservatism).

But who cares? As much as I like Tancredo, I'm not voting for "Mr. Second Best" at this point, and I'm certainly not going for "Number Three" Hunter yet... it's the Primaries, and Ron Paul is already beating them both. I'm voting for Ron Paul -- The BEST OF ALL!

[wagglebee]

A decade ago, Ron Paul made sense, he is now totally off the reservation. And now it looks like in addition to explaining to the Rudyites that this is a conservative site, we will have to explain to the Paulines that it isn't a libertarian site.

[jveritas]

Excellent post.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Hmm....this old recyled stuff again. Your original post misleading implied that Mohammed had confessed to getting Iraqi help. If you are looking for AQ ties, the best candidate was always the Saudi monarchy (our ally) rather than a maverick secular nationalist like Saddam.

[massadvj]

I admit now that Ron Paul was right about Iraq and I was wrong. But I still believe, having undertaken the war, we must stay and win.

I vehemently disagree with him on trade and immigration.

Everything else, I would say we are in complete accord on.

To me, the purpose of nominating a candidate is to win. So if a candidate has no chance of winning, I am not going to support him, regardless of how closely his views are to mine.

After working and spending my heart out for Santorum and Swann last year, it is clear to me that no social conservative can win in PA. It appears the same is true in OH, MO, VA. So until I see evidence to the contrary, Giuliani is my man.

[massadvj]

I admit now that Ron Paul was right about Iraq and I was wrong. But I still believe, having undertaken the war, we must stay and win.

I vehemently disagree with him on trade and immigration.

Everything else, I would say we are in complete accord on.

To me, the purpose of nominating a candidate is to win. So if a candidate has no chance of winning, I am not going to support him, regardless of how closely his views are to mine.

After working and spending my heart out for Santorum and Swann last year, it is clear to me that no social conservative can win in PA. It appears the same is true in OH, MO, VA. So until I see evidence to the contrary, Giuliani is my man.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Well, if it is of any comfort to you, be assured I shall be deeply grieved by your absence.

[dc-zoo]

Ron Paul leading...? ROTFLMAO!!

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Er... would you say that the following Votes are "Pro Open Borders"?

- Requires the construction of approximately 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border (Sec. 1002)
- Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to take over operations to maintain and control U.S. borders by upgrading surveillance technology, hiring and training more Border Patrol agents, improving border infrastructure, and deploying more U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel along areas of high immigration entrance within 18 months of enactment (Sec. 101)
- Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to report to Congress the progress of controlling and maintaining U.S. land and maritime borders within one year of enactment (Sec. 101)
- Includes "repeated attempts to enter the country illegally" in the definition of an aggravated felony (Sec. 201)
- Establishes an employment eligibility verification system which requires employers to verify the legal status of each employee or face a penalty for withholding employee information (Sec. 701)
- Sets a civil penalty for employers of $5,000 to $7,500 per undocumented immigrant for failure to comply with requirements of the employment eligibility verification system (Sec. 706)
- Requires the detention of any undocumented immigrant attempting to enter the country after October 1, 2006, until deportation or final decision granting admissions to the U.S. (Sec. 401)
- Increases fines and imprisonment to individuals who smuggle undocumented immigrants into the U.S. (Sec. 274)
- Creates the Office of Air and Marine Operations to prevent individuals attempting to enter U.S. airspace or waters for the purpose of transporting drugs, human trafficking, and terrorist activities (Sec. 502)
- Ends the Diversity Immigrant Program which randomly selects and grants green cards to individuals awaiting entry into the U.S. (Sec. 1102, as adopted in H Amdt 650)
- $1 billion annually for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (Sec. 224)
- $650 million from 2007 through 2011 for the Institutional Removal Program which ensures that “removable criminals aliens” in prison are removed from the U.S. and not released into communities following the completion of their prison sentence (Sec. 223)
- $250 million annually for state and local police agencies for their assistance in enforcing new immigration laws (Sec. 222)

Because... um... Ron Paul voted "YES" on all those things.

RON PAUL is the RIGHT Candidate on Illegal Immigration.

• Ron Paul voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006. “Amnesty for lawbreakers is not the answer, and it’s time to rethink birthright citizenship,” Paul added. ("Paul Votes for Stronger Border Security")
• Ron Paul is a co-sponsor of HR 487, which "expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway or enter into any plans to create a North American Union between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico."
• "We need to allocate far more resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase." – Ron Paul (source)

Best, OP

[Austin Willard Wright]

A decade ago, Ron Paul made sense,

You imply that Ron Paul has somehow changed his views (e.g. no longer "makes sense") but you do not provide a single example. This is quite revealing.

Ten years ago, many conservatives agreed that Paul's opposition to nation/building Wilsonian wars like Kosovo "made sense." Now, they want to attempt the same goals in Iraq. Through it all, Paul has consistently "made sense" by sticking to principle on this issue and others. Paul hasn't changed, but perhaps you have.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Ron Paul leading...? ROTFLMAO!!

He's already leading over Hunter and Tancredo.

Not bad for being, officially, only ONE DAY in the race.

[AuntB]

OrthodoxPresbyterian said: "Hunter is usually amongst the worst of the Republicans in terms of Fiscal Conservatism".

You will need to source that other than his ONE detractor, the Club for Growth, which isn't conservative but does have an open border, cheap labor trade at any cost agenda.

According to Citizens against Government Waste, 'pork' is defined as :

A "pork" project is a line-item in an appropriations bill that designates tax dollars for a specific purpose in circumvention of established budgetary procedures, according to Citizens Against Government Waste.

http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_earmarks.

They don't list Hunter as a 'porker'(earmarks). Please show us, other than spending on military for this war, where you find that Hunter is a porker or big spender.

Here's the list from 2001 of the porkers of the month. Lots of R's and D's there, but no Duncan Hunter or House Armed Services Committe, which he headed . They do show as porkers among many: Tommy Thompson, Sen. Robert Bennett, Sen. Joe Lieberman , Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison , Rep. John Peterson (R-Pa.) , Sen. John Thune,Reps. Tom DeLay , Sens. Hillary Clinton , Sen. Larry Craig

http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_porkerofthemonth_hallofshame

[George W. Bush]

US outta the UN, and UN outta the US. -- Ron Paul

Amen.

With Ron Paul, you know he means what he says and he'll still have that same position years from now.

He has a consistency that the other GOP candidates can't match. I suppose it's that honesty thing.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Not at all...it's pretty much common knowledge within the intelligence community that Saddam jumped into bed with every Islamic terrorist organization that his agents could make contact with so that he could clandestinely support operations against the U.S. and Israel in the aftermath of DESERT STORM. The fledgling Al Qaeda (at the time) was no exception.

Also, don't forget that Saddam activiely supported HAMAS homicide bomber strikes against Israeli civilians by subsidizing the bombers' families to the tune of $25,000 per clip.

No Saddam was definitely a BIG part of the interlocking global terrorist networks, and he needed to go down hard. Ron Paul, therefore, is just plain wrong about the war and its goals.