Big turnout for the little Texan: Ron Paul at the U

The Minneapolis Star Tribune ^ | September 26, 2009 | Pat Doyle

[GoldStandard]

If you think speeches attacking the U.S. Federal Reserve couldn't excite a Friday night crowd on a college campus, think again.

About 2,000 people -- students and older adults who were in the majority -- filled Northrop Auditorium at the University of Minnesota to cheer libertarian Rep. Ron Paul, a Texas Republican, as he joined Rep. Michele Bachmann to preach the gospel of a less powerful federal government.

Before Bachmann, R-Minn., introduced Paul, she hailed legislation of his that would require a detailed audit of the Fed. The crowd jumped to its feet and roared approval.

When she described the Fed's actions helping the banking industry as "shrouded in secrecy," one man jumped up and yelled, "Ponzi scheme!"

[DakotaRed]

he voted to go after them in Afghanistan.

Yet, he now wants to just pull out of there too, leaving the Taliban and Al Qaeda stronger and with the potential they will cause Pakistan to also fall?

Does it not enter your mind that Pakistan has nuclear weapons and allowing that to happen gives those who planned and trained terrorists to carry out 911 access to nuclear weaponry?

With his desire togut intelligence and law enforcement agencies, did you not see the plots uncovered and arrests just this week?

How can you trust a man who would allow that to happen within our country?

[elkfersupper]

But can't conservatives find a better example then Ron Paul? I think we can.

Don't see one.

Who would that be?

[rabscuttle385]

I’m just noting that it looks like the Paulites on this forum have developed a knee-jerk “Attack America First!” attitude.

Hey n00b, pointing out that the Nazis admitted to being inspired by U.S. eugenics, started by leftists who were the predecessors to today's "progressives," does not constitute an "attack America first!" attitude.

I will call out evil and stupidity wherever I find it, even if it's on our own side.

You, on the other hand, are defending racist, un-Constitutional progressive public policy on a conservatarian Web site.

Once again — your response was NOT to call the Comedian on the carpet for his desire to, as Kurtz would have put it, “exterminate the [Afghani] brutes.”

As for The Comedian, yet another n00b, I saw no such desire to "exterminate" Afghan civilians, as you contend.

[randomhero97]

Like I said earlier, these hacks must of supported the foreign policy of the LBJ, Carter, and Clinton administrations. They must also fully support the obama foreign policy as well. If not, then they “blame America first.”

[Poe White Trash]

>>> Hey n00b, pointing out that the Nazis admitted to being inspired by U.S. eugenics, started by leftists who were the predecessors to today’s “progressives,” does not constitute an “attack America first!” attitude. <<<

“n00b”? Now that’s what I call an intelligent and mature response!

Well, at least you’re personally attacking ME and not some aspect of America. That’s a move in the right direction...

But then — oops! — it’s back to “U.S. eugenics” influencing the Nazis. No Paulite can hear of something awful being done by another nation — here, the genocidal Nazis — without offering the U.S.’s reputation in response as sacrifice:

“Yep, those Nazis were evil bastiches, but U.S. eugenicists were up to the same mischief! And we did it first!”

Keep up with this knee-jesk, Attack America First relativizing and you might get a date with one of those Code Pink chicks. It wouldn’t surprise me.

>>> I will call out evil and stupidity wherever I find it, even if it’s on our own side. <<<

I call evil out when it’s a matter of people like the Comedian advocating the nuclear extermination of a whole nation. Why didn’t you start by calling out the Comedian? Why did you call out America...first?

>>> You, on the other hand, are defending racist, un-Constitutional progressive public policy on a conservatarian Web site. <<<

In my last post, I wrote that:

“I have no brief for the progressives, just as I have none for eugenicists or Nazis.”

Which is to say that I compared US progressives to Nazis. To murderous monsters.

Why are you LYING and saying that I’m supporting Progressives? Is this the best that Paulites can do — to LIE about those with whom they disagree?

>>> As for The Comedian, yet another n00b, I saw no such desire to “exterminate” Afghan civilians, as you contend. <<<

If we had “gone nuclear in Afghanistan the first week of the war,” like the Comedian advocated in Post #12, the blast and radiation from the nukes would have killed the Afghani “civilians” and everyone else in the area. That’s what the Comedian advocated, and what he defended in his later posts. Once again: someone advocates exterminating a nation of people with nukes, and the most you can say is that he is a “noob.” Fascinating!

Why are you LYING about me? Why are you LYING about the meaning of the the Comedian’s posts? LYING — is that the Paulite Way?

[freepersunite]

sir, we have been there 9 YEARS, that’s longer than World war 1 and world war 2 combined. It’s time to finish it because it’s not sustainable to be there for decades, it costs too much and is a drain (see vietnam), THERE IS NO VICTORY just more death and humilation in an unknown land.

Many have tried to conquer Afghanistan over the centuries it’s just not worth it. The idea over the invasion was to get Bin Laden and take out the Al Qeada not to be there 9 years and counting!

[The Comedian]

Once again — your response was NOT to call the Comedian on the carpet for his desire to, as Kurtz would have put it, “exterminate the [Afghani] brutes.”

As for The Comedian, yet another n00b, I saw no such desire to "exterminate" Afghan civilians, as you contend.

Thanks for the backhanded compliment, rabs.

Extermination of civilians is the farthest thing from my mind. I was proposing an immediate use of nuclear weapons in order to achieve 3 goals simultaneously:

1) Show the rest of the ideologically-aligned Muslim world that you do *not* strike America, because America will incinerate one of your cities for every attack you make. This is the only sort of demonstration that would make an impact on the 8th century mind.

2) Minimize casualties - Just as in the Japanese example, causing immediate capitulation via demonstration of atomic weaponry saves military lives on both sides, and civilian lives who would otherwise get caught up in conventional warfare.

3) Minimize financial and tactical disturbance to American infrastructure. No troops deployed overseas, no boots on foreign soil. No costly supply lines to maintain or political concessions made to marginally hostile governments for logistical necessity's sake.

I have nothing against the Afghan people, but my loyalty and concern is for Americans first and foremost. And frankly, which would the inhabitants of the world suffer more because of, the collapse of everything American, or the disappearance of Afghanistan from the world stage?

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[DakotaRed]

the funny thing is Ron Paul received more donations from active and retired military THAN ANY OTHER CANDIDATE

The only thing worse than spreading false propaganda is when you begin believing it yourself.

This claim was shown false before he dropped out.

The country rejected his whiny performance in 1988 and again in 2008. GET OVER IT!

[DakotaRed]

we have been there 9 YEARS,

And they have been attacking us for 3 decades

And, "WE?"

Why do I doubt you've never left the comfort of your living room?

For many of ht anti-war crowd, I honestly believe they are that way because of the deathly fear they might be called upon to stand up and defend their country.

[Poe White Trash]

Apologies for not pinging you earlier when I responded to Rabscuttle’s “defense” of you. I see now that I was being rude.

>>> Extermination of civilians is the farthest thing from my mind. <<<

Nuclear weapons tend to kill lots of people, whether they be civilians, soldiers, or anyone else. That’s why they have been a weapon of last resort — or, better yet, no resort — since August 1945.

By the way, why the sudden use of the word “civilian” in relation to the Afghans?

In Post #47, in response to my attempt to remind you that the Afghans were people, you wrote:

“They are not men, they are Devo.”

You also seemed to be playing with Social Darwinist ideas when you wrote in the same post that:

“All cultures are not equally valid or destined for longevity.”

Could it be that you now see them as being more than Devo or grist for some Darwinian mill? You know, see them as fellow human beings? If so, good show!

Now, let’s look at your nuclear goals:

“1) Show the rest of the ideologically-aligned Muslim world that you do *not* strike America, because America will incinerate one of your cities for every attack you make. This is the only sort of demonstration that would make an impact on the 8th century mind.”

Read your Heinlein. If you want to send a message, use Western Union. For centuries, the “Western Union” of the US in conflicts overseas has been the Marines. Nuking Kabul or Kandahar would have impressed the Islamofascists — along with the Chinese, the Russkies, and everyone else — that America’s leadership had gone completely bonkers. The resulting international arms race/diplomatic disaster/cold to hot war would have been cold comfort to us Americans. Luckily, there was no President Comedian in 2001 and thus we avoided this strategic disaster.

“2) Minimize casualties - Just as in the Japanese example, causing immediate capitulation via demonstration of atomic weaponry saves military lives on both sides, and civilian lives who would otherwise get caught up in conventional warfare.”

Thanks once more for expressing some concern for casualties, although I don’t see how nuking, say, Kabul (pop. 2.5 million) would minimize casualties in relation to what would have been likely Afghan/Coalition deaths caused by Operation Enduring Freedom (so far — Coalition deaths, 1422; Afghan deaths, unclear; I’ve seen estimates ranging from 30-80 thousand). Nuking Kabul (or even Kandahar) would have been gratuitous and monstrous, and would have just embroiled us in the sort of international mess that would have gladdened the hearts of the jihadis.

>>> 3) Minimize financial and tactical disturbance to American infrastructure. No troops deployed overseas, no boots on foreign soil. No costly supply lines to maintain or political concessions made to marginally hostile governments for logistical necessity’s sake. <<<

Yup. But then you have to deal with the aftermath: trade sanctions, embargos, trade wars, proxy wars, renewed nuclear arms race, restless former allies, etc. Are you THAT nostalgic for the 70s? Your choice is a relatively cheap “quick fix” that would cause the US headaches, and then nightmares, not-so-far down the line.

>>> And frankly, which would the inhabitants of the world suffer more because of, the collapse of everything American, or the disappearance of Afghanistan from the world stage? <<<

So, “[you] have nothing against the Afghan people, but...” Nuclear annihilation or devastation — that’s quite a BUT! Your social darwinism is peeking out again. C’mon man, snap out of it!

You have proven no need to “disappear” Afghanistan in order to keep the US secure, or the Islamofascists at bay. Your continual toying with the idea of nuking the Afghans is at the very least gratuitous, and bespeaks an attitude that is at best juvenile, at worst depraved and evil. You can do better than this.

[The Comedian]

Your continual toying with the idea of nuking the Afghans is at the very least gratuitous, and bespeaks an attitude that is at best juvenile, at worst depraved and evil.

Too many assertions and assumptions from you for me to patiently deal with.

1) Social Darwinism comes into play when a rabid attack by an inferior force is made. That inferior force must be utterly destroyed, so that it doesn't spring up again to harrow my children.

2) I am not concerned with coddling your delicate sensibilities, nor in promising to avoid collateral damage at all costs. If a force attacks my family, neighbors, or nation, I want it exterminated. Not contained, not pacified, not domesticated. Exterminated. Cheaply. Quickly. Finally. Nukes fit that bill nicely.

Forgive me for having a highly developed appreciation for physics, and leaving mercy to God.

If God wants al Queda to experience mercy under my rule, He'll cause the fission trigger on my H-bomb to fail.

[Poe White Trash]

>>> If God wants al Queda to experience mercy under my rule, He’ll cause the fission trigger on my H-bomb to fail. <<<

An H-Bomb? So much for the Afghan civilians. I see that your concern for them is as real as your conservative ideals. Have a nice day, and give my regards to your bolshie soulmates at DU.

On second thought, ixnay on the “regards.”

[The Comedian]

give my regards to your bolshie soulmates at DU.

Ah yes, the tradionale salude of the intellectual coward.

The ad hominem DU attack.

Adios, nobody.

[grey_whiskers]

This post of yours has inspired a number of T-shirt/bumper sticker slogans:

Appeasement is not the answer.

You can't stop a terrorist with raised eyebrows.

Drop H-bombs not F-bombs.

If war is not the answer, why are you driving a Mercedes?

If Nukes don't work, why are you driving a Prius?

Know Jihad, No Peace / No Jihad, Know Peace

Cheers!

[Poe White Trash]

NOT an ad hominem attack, merely an attempt at description.

A depraved indifference to human death and an unwillingness to deal with the consequences of one’s choices — I’d say that’s a fair and accurate description of the attitude of someone who posts that it would have been a good idea to H-Bomb the Afghans back in ‘01. “Bolshevik” isn’t a bad descriptor.

Not my Conservatism. Get thee back to DU, troll.

[The Comedian]

NOT an ad hominem attack, merely an attempt at description.

...

Not my Conservatism. Get thee back to DU, troll.

You are a posting, drooling self-parody with a perfectly apt screen name whose "Conservatism" is most likely faxed from the DNC.

I think I'll stay right here, surrounded by people far brighter than you, thank you very much.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[Poe White Trash]

>>> ... whose “Conservatism” is most likely faxed from the DNC. <<<

You’re a mindreader! That’s exactly what I’ve been thinking of you!

>>> I think I’ll stay right here... <<<

How unfortunate. However, I don’t doubt that the Moderators will get around to you eventually.

[The Comedian]

How unfortunate. However, I don’t doubt that the Moderators will get around to you eventually.

If I can get kicked out of here for disagreeing with the likes of you, I'll run to the exit myself.

BTW, appeal to authority is, like the rest of your mushy liberal mindset, a dead give-away that you are too intellectually and emotionally immature to stand on personal convictions which are in turn founded upon objective reality.

Let me know if and when you grow up and join those of us who actually understand human liberty.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[Poe White Trash]

>>> If I can get kicked out of here for disagreeing with the likes of you, I’ll run to the exit myself. <<<

Walk, don’t run. I wouldn’t want you to trip and scrape your knee.

>>> BTW, appeal to authority is, like the rest of your mushy liberal mindset, a dead give-away that you are too intellectually and emotionally immature to stand on personal convictions which are in turn founded upon objective reality. <<<

Not an appeal to authority, merely an observation of fact. I’ve noted that folks who advocate positions as nutty and as inconsistent as yours — “Afghan civilians...protect ‘em or H-Bomb ‘em?” — tend to have a short shelf life on this site. This is because, despite what your DU — or is it Stormfront? — buddies may have told you, there is a paucity of Dr. Strangelove wannabes and Social Darwinist racists here.

Also, I find it quite amusing to be lectured on intellectual ability and emotional maturity by someone who thinks that nuking Afghanistan would have been a rational response to 9/11. And that Afghans are Devo/subhumans. LOL!

>>> Let me know if and when you grow up and join those of us who actually understand human liberty. <<<

“Actually understand human liberty?” What, you mean the liberty to use nukes to exterminate whole nations of people? If you think that THAT constitutes a mature exercise of liberty, you really do belong at DU or Stormfront.