Not going to vote for ANYONE who will not fight terrorism on their home turf not ours. ANYONE
Posted on 05/11/2007 3:15:42 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Talk is cheap. Voting records speak louder than words.
How did we win the election in the year 2000? We talked about a humble foreign policy: No nation-building; don’t police the world. That’s conservative, it’s Republican, it’s pro-American - it follows the founding fathers. And, besides, it follows the Constitution.
Ron Paul
I believe that when we overdo our military aggressiveness, it actually weakens our national defense. I mean, we stood up to the Soviets. They had 40,000 nuclear weapons. Now we’re fretting day in and day and night about third-world countries that have no army, navy or air force.
Ron Paul
When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads.
Ron Paul
http://paul4prez.blogspot.com/2007/03/ron-paul-quotes.html
How idiotic is that thinking?! Libby got prosecuted by a special counsel who was appointed in a unconstitutionally. Fruit of a Bad Tree (in spades) can not be allowed to be eaten.
I know this isn’t going to be too popular of an idea, but I suspect that the poll was skewed by Howard Stern callers. In my opinion, Stern is skewing all TV polls, just like he did with American Idol. In the minds of those jokers, they probably feel like Ron Paul has the least likely chance of winning, so they called in to screw up the MSNBC poll. But that’s just what I suspect. I’m curious to see what happens after the Fox debate.
Not going to vote for ANYONE who will not fight terrorism on their home turf not ours. ANYONE
It certain does, if Mr. Paul had simply said that in the debate. Unfortunately, he just had to make a little snide remark that Libby should not be pardoned DUE to Libby's record on Iraq. That is certainly not a "constitutional" position, but I guess we can take comfort in the fact Ron Paul didn't really "mean" that and was just airing out his personal "feelings" on Iraq.
Once again, the question is whether Paul "won" the debate and the hearts of minds of votes when he made remarks like that. You Ron Paul supporters really seem to have difficulty with the concept that the person who would make the "best" President in your eyes is not necessarily the best "debator" on stage.
I support Tommy Thompson, and I don't think he "won" the debate, though overall I'd say his answers were better thought that your guy lecturing everyone else on what is "constitutional"
Once again, the great jveritas chimes in with an insult in his very first post on the thread. It is a good thing you have done such fantastic work on translating iraq docs (and I mean that), because if not for that your vile personal attacks and total lack of interest in logical debate would have had you booted from here a long time ago.
I am in full agreement with you, can you really consider it a debate? It had all the trappings of a cheap, paid infomercial which made the candidates look dopey and clearly unimpressive.
I may have missed it, but what part of you link asserts that? It asserted that he goes on truther radio shows, and that he thinks the US will fabricate an incident to go to war with Iran, but I didn't see anything about the collapse of the WTC buildings.
So does Hunter.
Now, you may disagree with him on the Effectiveness of Foreign Wars -- but I say, even IF an Expansionist Foreign Policy DOES "work", let's protect our own Borders First and go from there!!
Hunter built the border fence in San Diego. He coauthored the bill that extends it for hundreds of miles. He's long been an advocate for secure borders.
In other words, Hunter backs up his words with action. And unlike Ron Paul, he grasps what would happen if we withdrew from Iraq now before the job is done: a bloodbath of epic proportions that would make the Killing Fields of Cambodia come off as a mere school shooting in comparison.
Really? Perhaps you could point out some legislation in his many long years in congress that he's proposed or gotten into law on those subjects. Has Ron gotten any other congressmen to endorse him yet?
It’s his reasoning that’s disturbing. He advocated not granting him a pardon for something totally unrelated to the criminal proceeding. And the crime was ludicrous as it was. How is THAT Constitutional?
He will be in the Fox debate and now today he'll be in the debate on CNN in New Hampshire. Will be nice to see a candidate instead of Giuliani's 'optimism', McCain's creepy 'gates of hell' with a smile, or Romney's $5000 suit (nothing wrong with being well dressed but when that's all you've got and you just parrot the other two hacks it's not really a candidacy is it?)
In the sense that Ron Paul distinguished himself from the field as holding a different view on our Muslim jihadist enemies, he did well in the debate. Some nominal conservatives do want us to leave Iraq immediately without concern about what happens next. They may be drawn to him as a result of the debate. They will not be enough to give him victory in any state primary or caucus, and his statements assured that he won't pick up enough support to win any primary or caucus. In that sense, he lost the debate.
Bill
Duncan Hunter may not be the biggest fiscal conservative of the lot, but that's only because he was one of those with the primary responsibility of funding our military. Why should I have a problem with that?
Osma Bin Laden claimed the 911 attack on the WTC was, in part, because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. He demanded we remove them...and within 18 months of 911 we had done as he demanded. A coddle?
We cheer as a secular dictator is hanged while the President is in Crawford Tx holding hands with wahabbist Saudi Prince's.
If we secure our borders and limit any and all immigration from the ME we can be secure our safety. And this administration's diplomacy towards axis of evil member NK is lame...Carterish so to speak.
Describe what a victory in Iraq will look like. Sunni and Shia Muslims standing with Turkish Kurds holding hands and singing kumbaya? An Islamic Shia government in bed with Iran is what we have put in place. If nothing else, the nation building ambitions of that creature called the neo con has been discredited by this war.
You'd be wrong on that.
It’s one and the same, as the first terrorist to come across the border with a dirty bomb will make clear.
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.