Drudge GOP Debate Poll -- 50,000 votes; Clear Winners are Romney, Giuliani, and RON PAUL

Drudge Report ^ | May 4, 2007 | Orthodox Presbyterian

[BigTom85]

National debate is stifled. Ron Paul can win if people find a way out of the sheep pen that the boob tube keeps them in. If Ron Paul could win it would mark a revolutionary move back to originalist Constitutional thinking by our Executive. We might regain ground that has been lost to the creeping statism which has been steadily encroaching on this nation's people.

Right on, brother!

[pissant]

The only reason Bush spent the time dealing with the UN and extra focus on WMDs was to get as many hesitant allies on board. Proof of that is that we still invaded despite the UN voting against us.

Bush’s speeches in the run up to the congressional authroization vote did not focus solely on the UN’s role, by any stretch. It was WMDs, terrorist support, shooting at our planes, and Saddam’s threat to the region.

[George W. Bush]

You are grasping at straws here feller. The US isn’t in the business of defining religions of the world as satanist.

The United States is a country and will not face God's judgment in eternity.

But we will. Personally, I don't support dictators. I don't support false religions who deny Jesus Christ and persecute the saints. I do not support governments which are organized along those antichrist principles. I don't believe Islamists of any stripe are worth the blood of American soldiers who are sworn to uphold and defend our noble Constitution, not the Islamist constitution of a democracy-hating barbaric Islamic hellhole state.

Democracy cannot cure the cancer of Islam. Even Turkey would fall in short order were it not for regular military overthrows of their civilian government.

It is the nature of Islam.

[pissant]

yet americans have travelled safely for many decades in Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Morocco, Pakistan, Tunisia, and many other muslim countries. Before the new strain of anti-west terrorist islam was widespread.

Consider Jordan helped us track down Zarquawi and is training iraqi security forces as we speak. They also have been hanging homegrown terrorists with efficiency.

The UAE has had boots on the ground in Afghanistan for years now, with more proposed to come.

Pakistan has arrested and killed thousands of AQ and taliban types and has been instrumental in uncovering many terrorist plots.

Kuwait and Qatar allowed us basing to invade Iraq.

Morrocco has been fighting AQ with more ferocity than most european countries.

Even Yemen has been quietly helping the US in the WOT.

Vilifying all islamic countries is not in our interest. The VOLUNTEER muslim soldiers in Iraq fighting side by side with our troops are not the ememy. Period.

[Ike]

“But this (which drove my response, by the way) is OK, right? As long as one is not dissing Ron Paul. Good grief. Nothing like a double-standard.”

Ruh-Roh! Be careful WHOM you diss...

[Allegra]

Last I looked, my nation, the United States of America guaranteed me freedom of speech.

And I use it.

[Ike]

Applause, applause!
I never expected you to do otherwise!
(It’s been a bit rocky this week around here....)

[Allegra]

(It’s been a bit rocky this week around here....)

LOL - so I've noticed. I've seen the Neverending Thread.

But, I'll take my chances. I won't have my views censored.

And the day I support any member of the Surrender-Monkey-Cut-and-Run Crowd will be the day Saddam and his sons are shoveling snow down there in Hell. ;-)

[George W. Bush]

Vilifying all islamic countries is not in our interest.

They have vilified themselves. They degrade themselves with their false barracks religion.

While it may be useful to assess the level of danger they pose to civilization, they can never be trusted as long as they live under sharia or tolerate radical clerics.

Islam is not a religion. It's a totalitarian system much as Communism was. Any other view is wild-eyed optimism.

OTOH, I have no problem with Arabic Christians or non-Muslim Arabs. Well, the few that manage to survive their proximity to actual Islam, as opposed to the sweetly tolerant Islam you imagine.

[no dems]

To me Ron Paul seemed a little “fruity”. And, yes, I mean it in the way you think I meant it: FRUITY!!!

[pissant]

Have they vilified themselves? All of them? Seems to me that Allawi (the first PM of the fledgling Iraq gov't) fought against Saddam, and against the islamist parties in Iraq post Saddam. Is he our enemy? Is King Hussein of Jordan our enemy? Are the special forces in the Afghan Army that have been slaughtering Taliban? Are the hundreds of spies and translators we've recruited? Was the Northern Alliance Warlord in Afghanistan that fought the USSR, then fought the taliban for years before being assasinated? Are the brave souls in islam that take on the islamists for hijacking the religion?

Are these folks?

[Palladin]

Ron Paul reminds me of Ross Perot.

They even have the same initials.

[pissant]

I’m with you, Allegra.

[George W. Bush]

Are these folks?

You're asking the wrong person.

Although many people would say baby coons and baby coyotes are cute, I still shoot them, knowing exactly what they are. It is due to their nature, the natural course their lives will follow if unchecked.

As for your use of the charity of an American soldier, I recognize that American soldiers have always been very softhearted to those in occupied countries, something that goes back well over a century. It's not a flaw but it is certainly not something that sways my opinions any more than it would sway opinions at Foggy Bottom or CFR or DIA/CIA or even the New York Times.

Your citing of "good" Muslims fails to account for the vast majority of these barbarians who are and will remain a danger to civilization, just as they have for the last thousand years.

Would you be posting that pic and defending those Muslims tomorrow afternoon if Iran nuked Tel Aviv tomorrow morning? Or if Muslim terrorists exploded a dirty bomb in LAX or at the Stock Exchange? Or if they just had a little school event like the Chechens did in Russia a while back?

I think not. You can have the Muslims and their quaint Religion Of Peace™. I will instead heed Churchill's sound and sombre warning about their fundamental and chronic condition:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property‹either as a child, a wife, or a concubine‹must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science‹the science against which it had vainly struggled‹the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

I'll take Churchill. You can have Achmed.

[pissant]

Good grief. Even the Sunni tribesman have turned against AQ in al Anbar province to a large degree. Try top keep up with what’s going on.

[elizabetty]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGU2ZWY0MGZmYjAwYmU4NTg5MjJhOWRjMTg3MjZjMjc=

Another Omen [Jonah Goldberg]

Last night Ron Paul supporters flanked out across the web, voting in polls (including MSNBC's) and swamping comments sections in huge numbers. We've reached a point where this sort of thing is immediately recognizable as the disproportionate impact of the over-committed.

It's like netroot spam and seminar callers on C-SPAN.

I liked Ron Paul last night. I'm glad he's in the race.

But I'm already exhausted by what I know will be a long summer of e-pestering from Paulites about the "mass movement" sweeping the nation that won't earn more than a handful real votes, anywhere."

Ron Paul's spamers are not fooling anybody and irritating most Republicans.

[George W. Bush]

Even the Sunni tribesman have turned against AQ in al Anbar province to a large degree.

So is that worth another fifty dead or maimed American soldiers? Is it worth a hundred?

Maybe you could get a job with the Pentagon to go out to their homes and break the news and then explain it all to their mothers, why their sons had to die for the Sunni tribesmen of al-Anbar province. Sounds like rewarding work.

[bnelson44]

come from the same state too

[ChessExpert]

Tell me what victory in Iraq will look like???
Nya, Nya, Nya, Nya
Simple questions.
Nya, Nya, Nya

Simple questions, lots of attitude. I will try to remember that you are a Ron Paul supporter and not just some liberal Democrat.

Perhaps you think simple questions have simple answers. Here’s a simple answer from President Wilson ‘we are fighting the war to end all wars.’ Here’s another simple answer. Jimmy Carter thought we had an “inordinate fear of communism” and that if we just pulled back, the Russians would do likewise. It didn’t turn out that way.

This war resembles Vietnam. The Democrats abandoned our ally, South Vietnam. The 1974-75 Congress cut off funds and reneged on commitments. Democrats see their actions as right. But millions were murdered and enslaved in South East Asia. And it pushed back victory over the Russian communist empire by several decades.

On to new mischief. Iran was an American ally under the Shah of Iran. Jimmy Carter undermined the Shah, bringing in the Ayatollah Khomeini. He lit the flame of Islamic extremism that we are trying to extinguish today. Wouldn’t it be nice if Iran were an ally today instead of an enemy?

Conservatives predicted falling dominoes and mass murder, if we abandoned Vietnam. Although they may have been wrong on the specifics, they were generally right. These same types of conservatives predict matters will be worse if we abandon Iraq today.

We did not get peace by leaving Saddam and other supporters of terrorism alone. We won’t get peace by leaving them alone now.

We have had successes. FDR defeated Germany and Japan. We had success in Korea. Reagan/Bush defeated the Soviet Union. It may seem trite to say, but there really is no substitute for victory. The sooner, the better. It won’t be easy, but there is no better alternative. Sorry.

[cva66snipe]

Ron Paul may win despite the media and elitists GOP hierarchy for him :>}