To: presidio9; Clemenza; Allegra; wideawake
Idiot isolationist L.Ron is popular with Seattle liberals?
I’m shocked.
2 posted on
09/12/2007 7:23:37 AM PDT by
Petronski
(Cleveland Indians: Pennant -11)
To: Petronski
"I don't support abortion, but I don't want to pass any federal law to regulate it," he added. My, what a champion of the unborn. He's personally opposed, but . . .
4 posted on
09/12/2007 7:25:03 AM PDT by
wideawake
(Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
To: Petronski
I am embarrassed that this weenie is from Texas. The sooner he loses the better.
16 posted on
09/12/2007 7:30:57 AM PDT by
Ditter
To: Petronski
Bush has moved us much in this direction by insisting that other nations provide for their own defense and by planning to close foreign bases.
I may fall in love with Paul, as I also agree that the Fed claims to control too much land. Recently, I saw that they have expanded the set aside of TR by ten times. They do a lousy job of managing it. However, I would reenact the Homestead law so the land goes to people, not states.
17 posted on
09/12/2007 7:31:17 AM PDT by
ClaireSolt
(Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
To: Petronski
Do you have the Wyler’s ready? You know the Paulestinians will be here momentarily.
25 posted on
09/12/2007 7:36:01 AM PDT by
rightwingintelligentsia
(You know a liberal has lost the argument when he calls you a Nazi.)
To: Petronski; wideawake
And U.S. troops in Europe?
"I would get them home," Paul said in an interview Tuesday. "Having them stationed abroad doesn't serve our national interest, and that goes for forces in Japan and Korea.
"We should only send U.S. forces abroad when our security is directly threatened. Right now, nobody threatens our national security."
I disagree with Paul's perspective on this, at least in the short term. Having troops in Japan and Korea absolutely serves our national interests, as does a military presence in Iraq.
The long term is debatable, I think.
56 posted on
09/12/2007 8:03:32 AM PDT by
Oberon
(What does it take to make government shrink?)
To: Petronski
He would radically downsize the federal government. "I don't think there is any need for the Department of Education, the Department of Energy or particularly the monstrous Department of Homeland Security," he said Tuesday. Asked what role he sees for the federal government in education, Paul replied: "None. Nothing in the Constitution provides for a federal role."
Paul would seek to divest the federal government of its vast landholdings in the West. "I would always move in the direction of moving those lands to the states, except in special circumstances such as national parks."
Don't you agree with these statements? Every conservative should. If you don't, you just might be a liberal.
102 posted on
09/12/2007 9:11:26 AM PDT by
Iwo Jima
("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
To: Petronski
Why are you being fooled by these clinton Chinese Mafia seminar posters??
Pray for W and Our Troops
116 posted on
09/12/2007 9:24:07 AM PDT by
bray
(Member of the FR President Bush underground fighting FR BDS)
To: Petronski
He’s a moonbat as far as I have heard.
151 posted on
09/12/2007 9:44:11 AM PDT by
A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
To: Petronski
Please Ron, go home to Tx. and win your House seat and drop into the irrelevancy that you deserve. Of course, you need to keep putting out some of the bills that do define our Constitution. You are not so wrong in that procedure. But, you are not in the class of running this nation. Please go home and let others try to defeat Obama or Her Highness.
To: Petronski
244 posted on
09/12/2007 10:52:28 AM PDT by
juliej
(vote gop)
To: Petronski
We all want our troops home. Just with honor and victory.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson