WHY VOTE RON PAUL? Conservative Issues which are MORE IMPORTANT than Iraq

Ron Paul now 3rd Place on Free Republic ^ | May 4, 2007 | Orthodox Presbyterian

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

WHY VOTE RON PAUL?
Conservative Issues which are MORE IMPORTANT than Iraq:

With the recent surge of support enjoyed by United States Congressman Ron Paul in response to the first GOP Primary Debate (in terms of Viewer Reaction to the Debates, Ron Paul is now ranked Third Place on the Free Republic Poll, Third Place on the Drudge Report Poll, and First Place on the MSNBC Poll), it behooves all Conservatives to examine the Candidacy of Ron Paul and ask: as the former Leader of Ronald Reagan's Electoral Delegation from Texas, is Ron Paul the Right candidate to carry forward the Reagan Legacy in the new millennium?

Of course, it goes without saying that Ron Paul is the most Fiscally Conservative Candidate in the race; that he is the greatest defender of the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and indeed the entire Bill of Rights; and that he is a strong defender of the Right to Life and of US National Sovereignty -- none of that is in dispute. And it goes without saying that a "humble" foreign policy of Non-Interventionism is the traditional Conservative and Republican foreign policy, as opposed to the Liberal Interventionist policy of Nation-Building – which Conservatives have traditionally opposed.

However, given the recent ascendancy of Nation-Building "Neo-Conservatives" in the Republican ranks -- so-called "conservatives" who proclaim that Nation-Building in Iraq is utterly integral to the War on Terror and, indeed, outranks EVERY other issue in importance:

There is nothing more important than the WOT. All else takes the back seat.
67 posted on 05/03/2007 11:30:12 PM PDT by jrooney

We must ask ourselves -- is Iraq truly more important than ANY other Issue? Let us assume for a moment that Iraq IS a central front in the "War on Terror". And let us assume that being occupied by 140,000 foreign troops does NOT cause any Iraqi to consider joining the Jihadists when his wife or son or brother gets killed in an unfortunate spate of "collateral damage". And let us assume that trying to Police an Islamic Civil War while attempting to successfully engage in long-distance "Nation-Building" at the same time somehow IS even remotely Constitutional. Yes, let's assume ALL that!

The Question, then, is this: Are there any Issues which should be MORE important to Conservatives than Nation-Building in Iraq?

And the Answer... is a resounding YES.

• ABORTION: More Unborn Children in America die EVERY DAY from Abortion than all American Citizens who lost their lives in the 9/11 Attacks. source

  ABORTION is therefore FAR MORE IMPORTANT than spending Hundreds of Billions of Dollars trying to referee an Islamic Civil War in Iraq – and Ron Paul is RIGHT on Abortion. Ron Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, recognizing the Personhood of every unborn baby and removing Abortion from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

• ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: More American Citizens are Murdered EVERY YEAR by Illegal Immigrants than all American Citizens who lost their lives in the 9/11 Attacks. source

  ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is therefore MORE IMPORTANT than spending Hundreds of Billions of Dollars trying to referee an Islamic Civil War in Iraq – and Ron Paul is RIGHT 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")

• GUN CONTROL: In the 20th Century, nuclear weapons were used to kill a few hundred thousand people, whereas "gun control" was used by governments to pave the way for killing over 100,000,000 people. source

  Opposing GUN CONTROL is therefore MORE IMPORTANT than spending Hundreds of Billions of Dollars trying to referee an Islamic Civil War in Iraq – and Ron Paul is RIGHT on the Second Amendment. Ron Paul is one of only five Congressmen to have an A+ Rating from the Gun Owners of America.

• COMMUNISM: According to the MW Hodges Economic Report (endorsed by Nobel Laureate Economist Dr. Milton Friedman), the total Government Share of the US Economy (defined as total Government Spending at all levels PLUS the total cost of Regulatory Compliance) under Presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush has now significantly exceeded the Private Share of the US Economy. No wonder our workers can't compete with "Chinese Slave Labor" – even though we're much more Productive than they are, our Government is now actually more Communistic than that of the Red Chinese!
  
  Rolling Back COMMUNISM is therefore MORE IMPORTANT than spending Hundreds of Billions of Dollars trying to referee an Islamic Civil War in Iraq – and Ron Paul is RIGHT on Limited Government. Ron Paul is ranked by Human Events as the biggest Tax Cutter in all of Congress. Paul Named #1 Tax Cutter in Congress: “(Paul) is a co-sponsor… of a constitutional amendment to repeal the 16th amendment and end income, gift, and estate taxes. Regularly pushes for tax cuts. Sponsor of bills to allow tax credits for private school tuition, to permit tax deduction of college tuition, and to stop all taxation of Social Security benefits. Opposes all unconstitutional spending programs.”

ABORTION. ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. GUN CONTROL. Rolling back Domestic COMMUNISM. Taken individually, any ONE of these issues should be MORE IMPORTANT to True Conservatives than the War in Iraq. Taken as a group -- they are, together, FAR more important than the War in Iraq.

Rudy Giuliani is 100% Wrong on all of these issues -- and Ron Paul is 100% Right.

And that is why a Vote for Ron Paul is a Vote for True, Reagan-Republican Conservatism.

[CharlesWayneCT]

pro-sodomite

Is Ron Paul really against Sodomy? That would be remarkably odd for a libertarian.

[TheKidster]

Iffen we lose the constitutionally protected GOD given liberty beating the Muzzies won’t matter.

[jveritas]

Agree 100%.

[wouldntbprudent]

Ha ha ha . . . favored by MSNBC poll . . . ha ha ha!

[TheKidster]

If we don’t have constitutionally protected liberties winning the WOT won’t matter. Our boys are defending what over there? Your pride, your religion or your constitution?

[nuconvert]

“You are dead, DEAD wrong.” “Iffen we’re not over there... “

Excuse me. Apparently you don’t remember Sept 11th and don’t understand that the WOT is not limited to Iraq & Afghanistan, never has been. The terrorists have killed us and our allies in other countries as well as here for many years. Nor is it limited to Sunnis and Shi’ites.
This is truly a World War and won’t be over anytime soon - though you and Ron Paul and many others haven’t figured it out yet.
Yes, we need to tend to things at home (just as we did during WWII), but if we don’t continue to take the fight to the enemy, just as we did in WWII, we won’t have to worry about much in the future.

[SolidWood]

Then vote for Duncan Hunter. Everything you like about Paul except that Hunter is pro-Victory and right on defense.

[mathluv]

My pride and religion don't even come into the equation. The Constitution has been taking huge hits for years - not just since 2000.

If we don't win the WOT, what good will our Constitution do? I, personally, do not want to have to wear a burqa. Since I have no 'live-in' male relative, I would not be able to leave my house. Where could the Constitution prevent that?

[Neville72]

What does that mean? Slightly nutty cult leader who gets taken out by trigger-happy federal agents, who then covered up their incompetence?

Koresh=more then SLIGHTLY NUTTY.....ditto Ron Paul

[basil]

I didn’t read past the title—IMHO—there are NO issues more important than Iraq.

[Verax]

Point taken...I was out of line with my previous comment by the way...sorry.

[bikerMD]

I'm Voting for RU PAUL too!!

[billbears]

WHY VOTE RON PAUL? Conservative Issues which are MORE IMPORTANT than Iraq

Wait a minute. You mean there are things more important to conservatives than sticking our noses into the internal affairs of other nations that never represented a threat to our borders? What about 'spreading democracy'? What about nation building? That's got to be important to the Wilsonians, I mean, Republicans.

It was indeed refreshing to see a conservative candidate that stood, and strongly believes, for non-intervention and a non aggressionist foreign policy. Although my concern is that the question on tax and his response on sound money, while the correct position, may have gone over the heads of many that aren't used to a politician actually telling the truth. It definitely confused most of the other candidates on the stage.

[NordP]

Since were concerned with what's REALLY IMPORTANT...

All the Conservative issues in the World aren't going to make a bit of difference if we aren't here.

I'd say that was IMPORTANT.

[TheKidster]

the most important issue of our times which is the War on Terror.

That’s the myopic belief that the federal government will use to fool you into stripping yourself of your individual liberties and helping the fed strip constitutionally protected rights from those around you.

The most important issue of all times in the USA is defending the constitution from foreign and domestic threats. Your belief leaves the second front WIDE open and you’re either too stubbor, brainwashed or stupid to see it. Don’t support Ron Paul, that’s totally cool but don’t forget about the extra vigilence needed to protect the constitution from internal threats, especially those in positions of power within the federal government!

[TheZMan]

Wow. While I appreciate your efforts and respect your interest in a specific candidate, truly, the arguments made here are just barely outside the realm of strawmen.

You pick the hotbutton topics of the day that RP is conservative on and use the argument that they are “more important than” Iraq. Yes, I’ll agree with that sentiment. Securing the borders and stopping gun control are more important than Iraq.

But beyond that your arguments fail horribly. Conservatives in this country will NEVER elect a man willing to stand up in front of the country in a primary debate and use a liberal talking point to answer questions about the Iraq war. “False pretenses”, “lies”, “never should have in the first place”, blah blah blah. The man screwed himself by carrying that talking point.

By your own argument there are more important things than Iraq and we should leave. Do you honestly think we’re going to buy that pulling out of Iraq now and leaving it to become the next hotbed is the smartest move?

Why can’t I expect to elect a president that can handle more than 1 thing at a time? Why can’t I expect to elect a man who will continue to flush out and kill terrorists WHILE closing the border and stopping the gun grabbers? Why can’t I expect to elect a man that doesn’t come across as a shrill leftist in a debate, that doesn’t get support in a MSNBC poll, that doesn’t use dem playbook talking points?

Again, while I respect your efforts and your decision making; attempting to sway support here at FR to a man that just made himself essentially unelectable by conservatives is pretty shortsighted and shows you also lack the understanding of the world we now live in to make an educated appointment come election day.

Also remember that Rudy was the dem favorite for the GOP nomination because he’s a half liberal. If I had to take a guess at why Ron Paul became the most liked candidate on the MSNBC polls his supporters so willfully reference when declaring their support it’s because by his answers to the war in Iraq he proved himself to be a bigger loony than Rudy and as such more favorable to the “surrender now, get our asses kicked later” crowd. It’s sickening in it’s lack of insight.

[commonguymd]

I tried to like what he had to say, and some things he was dead on but appeasing the DU crowd and Matthews with the Scooter issue was appalling.

[TheKidster]

I view Paul and Murtha as two peas in in the same pod.
That’s because you have a shallow-Fox News sorta spoon-fed view of politics.

.Ron Paul opposing war in Iraq by voting NO when Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton voted YES (the first vote) HARDLY aligns him with them.

He has always supported the mission of regime change in Iraq but voted no on Constitutional grounds. He called for a formal Declaration of War as the Constitution demands.

This bears repeating! If we had formally declared war constitutionally the left and the MSM would have far less ammo to use against the administration day after day. This is the important point many here who call Paul a defeatist don’t know or refuse to acknowledge.

It was a wise position to take, our president should have taken it along with his allies in congress, he would have saved himself 6 years of daily loss of credibility. Our current difficulties in the press and with the left are a result of bypassing the constitution “cheating” if you will. Cheaters never win and winners never cheat. The GOP lost in ‘06.

[CMAC51]

Why these issues are not as important as Iraq (war against islamic jihad):

ABORTION: Sharia law will outlaw abortion with the death penalty as the ultimate control.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: Not an issue, Muslims may come and go as they please, all others will be tightly controlled.

GUN CONTROL: No problem, Muslims may possess as many guns as they wish. Anyone else with a gun will be killed.

COMMUNISM: Communism does not exist in Muslim countries. In fact no real economic system beyond blatant corruption is recognizable in Muslim countries. Materialism is contrary to fanatical Islam so don’t worry about it. Everybody but the leaders will be dirt poor. If you don’t like it there is always the death penalty.

We can surrender and run from Iraq. It won’t stop anything. They Will Keep Coming!

[TheKidster]

Wow you really are out of touch! Have you ever even seen a copy of the constitution?