Posted on 01/25/2008 12:59:01 PM PST by CautiouslyHopeful
With Fred Thompson out of the presidential race, who's a self-respecting conservative to go for? Could it be, maybe, perhaps, a certain Republican-libertarian from Texas?
That's one question perplexing California state Sen. Tom McClintock, possibly the second-most-famous California Republican currently in office after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
McClintock created a stir two months when he endorsed Thompson’s presidential candidacy. Having run for governor, lieutenant governor and state controller, McClintock has shown that while he has not won a statewide contest, he can win GOP primaries, which conservatives tend to dominate. So heading into the Feb. 5 primary, McClintock’s endorsement is seen as important in California.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
Sorry for the formatting.
Don’t forget McCain-Feingold.
But where does Romney stand. Here is a man who supports No Child Left Behind, supports the Department of Ed (flipping after being against it), supports minimum wage, supported regulating the energy industry, raised taxes (including the gas tax), forced citizens to accept government funded health insurance(!), flipped on gun control, flipped on the Bush tax cuts, flipped on gay rights, flipped on government-subsidized embryonic stem cell research, flipped on abortion—yes, he says he had a “Road to Damascus” conversion on that, but given all his other flips, do we really want to hang our hats on that.
Thus, I conclude he’s no better than McCain.
Is it that he is really “Anti-War” or is it more “Anti-Nation Building, Anti-UN authorized not really war war”?
Seems to me that THOSE ARE Republican Positions.
I’ve ignored him, not forgotten the [expletive]. Nothing I hate more than a hypocrite Christian. They make the real ones look badly. Huck is one of those kind. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
eeeew. but funny.
None of those references support your statement.
Yea call me picky but I would rather vote for a Mitt or a Rudy who actually cares whether we win than that clown you call a leader. By the way if you are so for Ron Paul...
I'm not for Ron Paul (I haven't picked a candidate yet -- Rudy and Huck were crossed off my list long ago, though). I'm just sick of the misrepresentation of positions and baseless rhetoric against -- it does nothing to advance the discussion. Statements like yours ('advocate surrender to Al Qaeda') are just not true.
And us Kalifornyans wouldn’t have a multiple billion dollar budget deficit if Tom was Guv. I voted for him, in spite of the scare tactics from the RINOs in Orange County.
Be careful saying that here. People will call you a doper. I happen to agree with you, and I’m sober as a judge.
Don't think of him as "anti-Iraqi-War"...think "Small Government, America-First, and Fiscally Responsible." Is it REALLY responsible for us to borrow $1,500,000,000,000 to stop the guy in the Middle East who was keeping Iran at bay and fighting for secularism in a Muslim country? Think about it...that's $10,000 for every American family, while we kept the border wide open. Does that REALLY help our security enough to borrow so much from the Chicoms?
Fiscal responsibility is supposed to be a conservative hallmark, yet we have an Administration that said, "Baloney!" to the idea that the Iraq could cost us as much as $300 billion. Can you imagine if a Democrat administration had given an estimate and then spent 20 times as much of taxpayers' money on something? FR would go NUTS.
Ron Paul is conservative, and that includes his foreign policy. And if you have trouble with the pullout idea, remember that he wouldn't take office for a year.
Or keep borrowing money to throw into the region.
Funny, I'm glad you brought that up...
Please note that These are contributions from employees of Google Inc. and not necessarily the "company" itself.
Now if you will please note here are the top 6 contributors to the RP campaign:
1) Google Inc $22,250
2) US Army $21,018
3) US Navy $14,105
4) Microsoft Corp $12,863
5) Huffines Communities $11,850
6) US Air Force $10,950
So it seems that although Google is the "Top" contributor... to the RP campaign, w/ $22,250, it could be argued that the true "Top" contributor is the US Miliary w/ $46,073.
Of course I am using the same source OpenSecrets.org - RON PAUL (R) Top Contributors
In the 1930s.
Funny, isn't it? People claim to want someone who is conservative and honest and tells it straight and isn't just pandering, yet when one comes along...
I knew I liked Tom McClintock. Now I like him even more. Go Ron go!
You don't... all but $10,799 of Paul's $8.2 million plus in campaign contributions (reported to the FEC so far) have come from individual donors, like me. Google's employees apparently have contributed more to him than the employees of any other company. One of them even quit his job a while back to campaign for Paul full-time.
I think SoCal is trying to smear Dr. Paul by implying that he gets corporate financing from them, and, by implication, is beholden to them in return. Not true... he can't be bought, and big donors like PACs and lobbyists quit trying years ago. There's too many politicians that can be bought for them to keep trying anyway.
As far as the google employees go, imagine that? A bunch of highly skilled, highly educated technology workers support Paul. He must be ashamed.
I’m presently resting my hopes on Romney’s success, because among the remaining candidates he is the only one with the combination of morals, intelligence, business-like manner, and recognition of what our main problems are, that is required of a president (in either party!).
Ron Paul is quite intelligent, and top shelf in economics and personal liberties, but his idea of how to conduct foreign policy is bizzare.
Thanks for the ping CCG.
If Ron Paul steals a few points from the other candidates, a brokered convention could be even more likely.
Henry Grady Weaver, author of a classic book on freedom, The Mainspring of Human Progress, years ago warned us that good intentions in politics are not good enough and actually are dangerous to the cause. Weaver stated:
“Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own. The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional do-gooders, who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others- with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means.”
This message is one we should all ponder.
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=740
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.