MD Straw Poll Results - Ron Paul Wins

"You cannot possibly be serious. What planet do you live on?"

Nice arguments you pose there. Which debate squad did you lead?

"...although JimRob's patience with them has been remarkable and is his call to make:"

I have been scratching my head on that one too ever since this Paulistinian surge of thread postings shortly after Prawn Paul announced his candidacy.

Even on this very thread, one can read things written by so-called Freepers that not only sound exactly like Cindy Sheehan or Harry Reid, but like Al Qaida propaganda.

Nice arguments you pose there. Which debate squad did you lead?

Not attempting to debate. No point in attempting nonsense.

********What’s your smoke of choice??? Must be powerful stuff to distort your rationality to that extent. A libertoonian holding the religious right. What a joke! This dope wants to make abortion a matter merely of state’s rights. Thanks, but no thanks. Not after thirty four years of 50+ million innocents slaughtered. Since when does a libertoonian want to do anything meaningful against homo marriage????? Certainly paleoPaulie does not want the fedgov to prevent such outrages.********

Every body agrees that the first step in getting rid of abortions is to repeal Roe v Wade, that would return the issue to the states. RP has been consistently pro-life and has never changed his pro life stance over the years. I don’t know his position on gay marriages.

******PaleoPaulie may hold some of those who worship at the mosque of the Almighty Dollar but he will have a lot harder time with union members and working class folks. If we had a tariff, why should it NOT be protective???? How about a tariff equal to every nickel saved moving American jobs abroad???? Now THAT would be an attractive idea to many. Your references to “demo light” suggest your membership in the mosque of the Almighty Dollar.******

Personally, I think any tariff is protective in regards to some product(s). The lower the tariff, the more it applies to just high end, low labor intensive products. By labeling his idea as a uniform, but not protective tariff, Ron Paul dodges the “protectionist” label that the “free traders” used to bash Pat B. Even ardent free traders are “ok” with a “revenue” tariff.

*******Unionized workers would be just thrilled to hear that paleoPaulie would eliminate progressive taxation altogether and make them pay the same rate as George Soros on consumption taxes whether vale added or “non-protective” tariffs.******

RP has said that he wants to eliminate the IRS and replace it with “nothing”. Other than gasoline, a very small part of my income goes to purchasing foreign products, so the uniform tariff would not affect much of my income. The uniform tariff would bring enough jobs back to the US that wages would go up via market forces and the average working person would be much better off.

******PaleoPaulie CAN NOT be nominated at all. If he were nominated, try to tell the rank and file non-Republican voter that it is time to apply the constitution (as seen by paleoPaulie and his paleopals) and abolish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, AFDC, Federal Housing Subsidies, “education” funding, student loans, student grants, veterans’ benefits, and a host of other programs that make up about 80% of the fedbudget so we can abolish taxes on the privileged. I would favor an end to some of those but it is NOT a salable package. If you thinkit is, how many moons are there in your sky? Since the constitution became effective, we have had many wars. I don’t know what political rhetoric led up to the elections preceding such wars and you probably don’t know either but the wars started in first terms include:******

Since I am probably much older than you, I grew up in a period when most of the programs you mention were not available. However, Ron Paul is much too smart to say that he would eliminate these things with a stroke of a pen. E.G. he would phase out SS by allowing young people to opt out. He would fund and protect the people now dependent on this program by the money saved by not fighting wars in places like Iraq. I currently have 3 children in college. Two of them get so many grants and scholarships, that they not only get a free ride, but plenty of spending money, for them, to boot. They are pretty frugal kids. I am not as pure as RP, so I accept the government excesses.

*****War of 1812: Madison’s first term

Mexican War: Polk’s first and only term

The Arrow War: Franklin Pierce’s only term

The War of the Second Great Rebellion: Lincoln’s first term

The Korean War: Truman’s First elected term

The Vietnam War: Kennedy’s first and only term or Johnson’s as you may prefer

The Gulf war: Bush the Elder’s only term

The Iraq War: Dubya’s first term******

You seemed to have left out The Spanish American War, WW I and WW II for some reason.

******Now, you also suggest that “illegal” immigration is the be all and end all of conservative policy. It is not. If it was, paleoPaulie has spoken against the immigration and voted against stopping it.******

Well, you will have to be more specific on this point.

******Just like he talks against earmarks and sees to it that they are jammed into appropriations bills that pass lubricated by pork juice for his district as he poses for holy pictures voting against them. Just as he claims to be pro-life, proposes pro-life bills BUT, when the rubber meets the road, wants only the overturn of Roe vs. Wade followed by exclusive state jurisdiction which will guarantee continued Holocaust of babies. Just as he may well claim to support marriage as the union of one man and one woman but NOT if it means actually doing anything to guarantee that Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court homomarriage disease is not crammed down everyone’s throat via the “full faith and credit” clause of the constitution.*****

Well, I never claimed he was perfect, but he is “close enough to perfect for me.” Country Western Song.

******In foreign policy and military matters, paleoPaulie and his love slaves are neither conservative nor even “moderate.” They are leftist antiAmerican antiwar windtunnels. What percentage of those who are in disagreement with Dubya on the war, would prefer that he nuke the SOBs and be done with them instead of fiddling around?*****

Actually, I thought there was a lot of merit in Trancredo’s (I think) suggestion that if the Muslims nuke NYC, we nuke one of their holy cities. Being the nice guys that we are, we would allow the citizens ample time to evacuate. I also like the idea of telling the terrorists that all our bullets are dipped in pig fat. So if we get you, you are not going to the heaven with all the virgins.

You can not be an occupying army in a country that doesn’t want you unless you are very brutal. You must make the cost so high for the average person that they will not lend any support to the insurgents. When Germany was occupying France in WW II, if a few Germans were killed by insurgents, they might kill 10 times as many people, or more, in the town.

I remember when I was an altruistic young kid and got in a fight. I got the other kid down, but let him up. He then proceed to beat the h*ll out of me. After that, if I got in a fight and got the other person down, he was not going to get up unless I was sure he was finished.

******Look, I applaud the RP supporter’s enthusiasm and conviction. All candidates should be so lucky to have that kind of support.*****

The fact that none of them do should give you a reason to think about why.

*****But you know and I know it’s the unethical, dirty, kook “by any means necessary”, nasty, vicious, threatening tactics RP supporters use to skew polls, belittle non-supporters, call talk shows and on and on that turns people off to RP. That in its self goes unaddressed by you which makes me think you support that kind of nonsense which is very puzzling to me...and we haven’t even discussed the candidate for God’s sake. In fact, these tactics parallel the lies and distortions used by the DNC, Code Pink, MoveOn.org, ANSWER and NARAL. How in good conscience can you endorse such dishonest tactics? I just don’t get it.******

If you look on the threads here it is not the RP supporters that are making nasty comments about supporters of other candidates. It is the other way around. E.g., we are not conservaties, we are DU, we are Demos sneaking in, etc.

*****Do you honestly think skewing polls will get your candidate elected? Weren’t you embarrassed when the poll in The Des Moines Register had RP up by 58% before the Iowa Straw Poll and he only got 9%? Don’t these supporters do more harm to RP’s credibility than help?*****

No, these kinds of polls measure how many active supporters a candidate has. Romney spent a bunch of bucks to win the Iowa Straw vote, why don’t you complain about that? But he didn’t have enough active supporters to help him in the Des Moines Register poll. How many people were encouraged to look at Ron Paul’s positions because he won the Register poll?

Ron Paul’s supporters are ardent and active. We may lose because the deck is stacked against us, but we are going to give it the old college try.

October 10. 2001. HR 3076.

A BILL

To authorize the President of the United States to issue letters of marque and reprisal with respect to certain acts of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, and other similar acts of war planned for the future.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds the following:

(1) That the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 upon the United States were acts of air piracy contrary to the law of nations.

(2) That the terrorist attacks were acts of war perpetrated by enemy belligerents to destroy the sovereign independence of the United States of America contrary to the law of nations.

(3) That the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks were actively aided and abetted by a conspiracy involving one Osama bin Laden and others known and unknown, either knowingly and actively affiliated with a terrorist organization known as al Qaeda or knowingly and actively conspiring with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, both of whom are dedicated to the destruction of the United States of America as a sovereign and independent nation.

(4) That the al Qaeda conspiracy is a continuing one among Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and others known and unknown with plans to commit additional acts of air piracy and other similar acts of war upon the United States of America and her people.

(5) That the act of war committed on September 11, 2001, by the al Qaeda conspirators, and the other acts of war planned by the al Qaeda conspirators, are contrary to the law of nations.

(6) That under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, Congress has the power to grant letters of marque and reprisal to punish, deter, and prevent the piratical aggressions and depredations and other acts of war of the al Qaeda conspirators.

SEC. 3. AUTHORITY OF PRESIDENT.

(a) The President of the United States is authorized and requested to commission, under officially issued letters of marque and reprisal, so many of privately armed and equipped persons and entities as, in his judgment, the service may require, with suitable instructions to the leaders thereof, to employ all means reasonably necessary to seize outside the geographic boundaries of the United States and its territories the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and of any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the air piratical aggressions and depredations perpetrated upon the United States of America on September 11, 2001, and for any planned future air piratical aggressions and depredations or other acts of war upon the United States of America and her people.

(b) The President of the United States is authorized to place a money bounty, drawn in his discretion from the $40,000,000,000 appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, under the authority of any letter of marque or reprisal issued under this Act.

(c) No letter of marque and reprisal shall be issued by the President without requiring the posting of a security bond in such amount as the President shall determine is sufficient to ensure that the letter be executed according to the terms and conditions thereof.

One of two Bills introduced by Dr. Paul to go after Terrorists.

Note: Dr. Paul also wants a SECURED border which is something President Bush is unwilling to do. Kind of makes the sitting President the one you should be directing your idiotic vitriol towards. After all, Bush wants to build a "democracy" in the middle of the terrorist Nations. Ron Paul wants to kill the terrorists no matter where they hide.

Get over your blind hatred of Ron Paul. Seriously. It makes you look stupid. The guy isn't Presidential material, but that does not mean he isn't RIGHT on a great number of issues.

>> I would not vote for Ron Paul or for Pee Wee Herman or for Larry Craig not that any one of them has a snowball’s chance in hell of being nominated for POTUS by the GOP. <<

If Ron Paul somehow managed to get the GOP nomination (which is less likely to happen than the Pope announcing he's converting to Hinduism), I would hold my nose and vote for him in the general election. Either way we'd end up with a terrorist-appeasing surrender monkey President that endangers national security. When faced with that choice, I'll pick the terrorist-appeasing surrender monkey who will veto abortion bills and halt higher taxes and spending.

But yes, I'm well aware if the shoe was on the other foot, the Paulites will NEVER support some of MY candidates in the general election, even the ones who agree with them on 95% of the issues.

There was a thread here on FR about a survey that showed the overwhemingly majority of Ron Paul supporters favor "no candidate" as a backup choice if their idol Ron Paul dropped out of the race. They are a bunch of fringe loons who insist those who doesn't agree with them on every issue are enemies of "the consitution". I simply won't lower myself to their level and use their own petty tactics of "my way or the highway". I've had it with the Ned Lamont-type purists on FR.

I certainly follow Ronald Reagan's belief that a candidate who agrees with me 80% of the time is not my enemy. Therefore I will support someone in the general election who agrees with me 80% of the time, even if I personally find them disgusting. (on the other hand, a backstabbing RINO like Mark Kirk or Judy Baar Topinka, or Arnie Schwartzkennedy, who agree with me perhaps 15-20% of the time, can take a long walk off a short pier)

Of course the Paulites who demand we support Ron because he agrees with us "90% of the time" will NEVER respond to my threads pointing out their hypocrisy, because they know I'm right.

Both the Fredheads and Paulites are in glass houses throwing stones when they demand we "get behind" their guy because he votes conservative over 80% of the time, when they are NOT willing to "get behind" anyone else's candidate who agrees with them over 80% of the time. They are perfectly willing to throw other candidates overboard who disagree with them on one issue, while they cry and moan constantly if someone refuses to vote for Fred or Ron because of an sinlge issue like Fred's membership in the CFR or the Ron's stance on the WOT. Total hypocrites.

THE "PURIST" BELIEVERS GENERALLY ARE:

PAULITES - The Paulites demand every politician on the planet agrees with them 100% of the time or is unworthy of office and doesn't "understand" the Consitution. Every since they drank the Paleo-libertarian kool-aid, they're convinced the only acceptable Congress would consist of 534 clones of Ron Paul.

FREDHEADS - The Fredheads are now demanding EVERY U.S. Senator agree with them 100% of the time. Fred had to be "drafted" because none of the other 10 Republicans running for President were acceptable, you see. And Senators like Jon Kyl, Saxby Chambliss, Lindsey Graham, Mel Martinez (all of whom are actually MORE conservative than their hero Fred, if you check voting records) are now their enemy and deserve defeat for daring to disagree with them on ONE bill. The except to the 100% pure rule is Fred himself, of course. When he voted the "wrong" way on McCain-Feingold, impeachment, the defense of marriage amendment, their responce is Fred was just upholding some "federalist principles" (funny, I don't remember them cheering on Harriet Miers for her "federalist" statement on abortion), and that "nobody's perfect" (except they want all the current members of the Senate to be perfect and vote their way on every issue)

Until all the Fredheads and Paulites tell me they're absolutely committed to supporting Lindsey Graham in the general election, they can go to hell with their "Do as I say, not as I do" demands.

He’s ahead of Duncan Hunter and the Kansas Senator. Even though Fox gives them a lot of airtime and gives Ron Paul next to none.

>> Dr. Paul also wants a SECURED border which is something President Bush is unwilling to do. <<

Funny how 20 years ago, Ron "Deport Illegals" Paul was perfectly happy to not only join a political party that openly espouses OPEN BORDERS, but to serve as their candidate on TOP of the NATONAL ticket and cheerlead for them. Check the Libertarian Party platform and you'll discover they're as supportive of Border Security as Madonna is to chastity. Free Movement of People has long been a key element of libertarianism, and they're so bad on this issue they make Mel Martinez look like a saint.

So Ron, who now claims to be of the minutemen mindset, marched in lockstep with the biggest open borders party in the U.S. 20 years ago.

What's next, Kate Michelman seeks the nomination of the Right to Life Party and promises to end abortion?

Will those going after ObL be allowed to use anything more modern than flintlocks and blunderbusses? Did you know that Old Ironsides is still a commissioned ship of the US Navy at Boston Harbor and occasionally sails? Will our 21st century pirates have to wear tri-cornered hats and eye patches and have a parrot on each soldier??? Will they dance the minuet only at formal balls of those holding letters of marque and reprisal??? Anyone who loves our country knows enough to despise paleoPaulie and anything else paleo. He is unbalanced. He is a farce. Paleowhateverism is NOT conservatism.

What is needed is our professional REGULAR military and it needs to be significantly expanded and lavishly equipped and well compensated and it does not need to be deployed as F Troop or as the Keystone Kops on the border while comic opera modern pirates try to do the heavy lifting in the Middle East Islamofasciststans. The Mexicans are here and the overwhelming majority are NOT going back. Get over it. When history is written, Dubya will look like a prophet and his opponents will look, well, embarrassing. The issue is dead and the border obsessives have lost. We are making up for 50 million sliced, diced and hamburgerized innocent babies. When the Junior League, the polo club or the yacht basin change stances and resist further abortions or "gay" "marriages" or support the RTKBA be sure to get back to us. Libertoonianism and conservatism are clean different things. I reserve the right to change my tack on this if the Mexican president continues to imagine that he can dictate policy to the US.

If paleoPaulie WERE presidential material, that would be proof that America is finished as a nation. Happily, he isn't and the US has fine prospects under adult leadership.

Now, it is also true that whether paleoPaulie is "right" on an issue doesn't matter one bit since he is unwilling to DO anything about any important issue. The litany of his two-faced ideological dishonesty is too long to be repeated here in detail but a few keywords for the trip down Memory Lane: treasonous weaselry in being an Al Qaeda spokesthing; disingenuous whining about declarations of war (when did ANY nation declare war since WWII and is there a reason why not like the UN Charter???); shrimpin' earmarks, troley earmarks, bus earmarks, many other earmarks. Kerry tried to be for things before he was against them and vice versa. PaleoPaulie wants to take both positions simultaneously.

I would bet that my IQ is a LOT higher than yours. Proof #I: I know what it is and you don't. Proof #2: You support the paleosurrendermonkey and I don't and you even regard the silly twit as a conservative.

Avast, Matey, all aboard the gunsloop Paleo for adventures in Islamofasciststan!!!

Based on the evidence to date, I can vote for Fred. He is not perfect but who is? He has presence and seems to be a grown up. Biography is often destiny. Other than that, yours is a good post. I certainly agree on the observations as to Schwarzenkennedy and the Illinois Combine types.

I am probably (regrettably) every bit as old as you are. Of course, getting older beats the available alternatives.

If you are an early Boomer as am I (1946), our generation made a despicable reputation for itself on this AntiAmerican antiwar business and ought not to repeat that mistake.

I was a volunteer lawyer for what was (erroneously) called Operation Rescue in my former state of residence. We have paleos like the Rockford Institute who are Ohhhh, soooooo worried that the property rights of the killers were being transgressed by pro-lifers. PaleoPaulie standing around posing for holy pictures and wanting to return abortion to the safe sanctuary of the states (like NY and CA) is simply insufficient. Roe vs. Wade has to go and we need the personhood approach to FEDERALLY outlaw abortion. Paleofussiness over whether the constitution provides federal jurisdiction is resolved by history and the 14th. Let Congress act instead of pose, including paleoPaulie.

We are not rendered helpless to stop the holocaust altogether.

Can't you just hear paleoPaulie bleating like an ACLU flack that the federal constitution does not cover marriage???? I am sorry but I have no desire to watch paleofussiesand leftists thwarting public will on marriage the way they have on abortion for decades. I want action and not posing for holy pictures. Just the kinda guy I am.

I am not a free trader. If you believe in protective tariffs, don't be afraid to say so. Pat Buchanan is and was right on this issue. I despise Hamilton's memory but even he was right on this tariff issue.

Ideologically, we may well be opposed to the welfare state programs, but they are too popular to eliminate and people have organized their lives around the expectations that the programs will be available. Like it or not, they won't suicide economically in the name of ideology.

WWI and WWII took place despite campaign promises by Wilson and FDR. The Spanish American War resulted from the sudden and unprovoked sinking of USS Maine in a Cuban harbor. It was the 12/7 or 9/11 of its era and I have no problem with that war. McKinley was an honorable man. FDR was an ideal war president in many ways. What was the alternative to WWII? Letting the nazis run wild in Europe permanently or Tojo in Asia??? Granting that FDR was not overly concerned with the fate pf Jews as established by his turning the passenger ship St. Louis away from the coast of Florida to send its Jewish passengers back to Hitler and the camps, would it have been a better policy and a source of pride if we had let Hitler exterminate ALL the Jews???? I don't think so. We should have been in earlier and saved a lot more Jews and others.

God invented Iowa as a source of a renewable ocean of pig blood that can be dropped from the sky to douse Teheran, Fallujah, Mecca, Medina, the Dome of the Rock, etc. Don't trust paleoPaulie on the pig-fat dipped bullets since he wants to TRADE!!! (Kumbaya now, Kumbaya!!!) with the enemy rather than destroy the enemy.

Yes indeed! God bless you and yours!

It is simple, while many seek a strong return on their entertainment dollar, he has found it within the Paul threads...

Those Fredheads are something else. Pain in the a$$ if you ask me.

Imagine how bad they are going to be when Fred wins the nomination.

Down right insufferable, I guarantee...

"God bless you and yours!"

Feelings are mutual.

"Not attempting to debate."

That's too bad, because you are in desparate need of hearing both sides.

I would bet that my IQ is a LOT higher than yours.

Four paragraphs of ad hominem attacks and insults and you still claim this? Try making a cogent point for a change and just MAYBE you'll have some evidence that you IQ is almost up to National average.

He could constantly remind the public that she has a consistent record in disasterous world policing and voted to authorize this war.

I see. He'd get the Cindy Sheehans.

Bush is not a Rockefeller Republican. At least not on social issues and judicial appointments. Maybe you’re a Rockefeller Republican on social issues and judicial appointments.