Replies

Ron Paul’s candidacy is good for the national debate. Let’s see how he does with the youth vote in the first primaries. It’s pretty clear the incumbent has lost it.

Someone remind me again why Ron Paul’s not a conservative? I’m wearing virtual flame retardant clothing against those who can’t tell rhetorical questions from actual ones. He has libertarian qualities, sure, and that’s what he’s usually classed as, but isn’t his attitude on foreign intervention the same or similar to Washington’s? Any differing policy after that is by definition also not conservative. And he’s very much pro-life, with his personal experience as an obstetrician and gynecologist to back it up. I’ve heard him called too queer-friendly, but need more details, which I’m sure someone will provide. Is his policy different from the Catholic Church’s one of hate the sin, love the sinner? Has he spoken on homosexual ‘marriage’?

I’d prefer his son Rand be running (that’s clear from my profile), but still don’t quite understand why there’s so much hostility to Ron Paul. I think the proverbial gunsights should be more squarely fixed in the direction of the enemy, the crypto-communist Democratic Party.

There is no possibility of reasoning with the Paul haters here. He isn’t the perfect candidate or conservative, but has far more virtues than liabilities. He isn’t going to get the nomination - it is inconceivable short of hyperinflation. Nevertheless, he helps by educating younger voters about fiscal, tax, and monetary issues. That is more than I can say about anyone else running. I think the main problem now is that there is no really strong candidate in sight, but it is still early.

He's a damned hypocrite!

He rails against PORK, yet he loads up Bills, he know will pass, with his own pet projects, then votes against them, so he can claim that he doesn't "like" PORK.

Ron Paul's candidcy isn't "good" for anything! He added nothing to the debates, last time around, except the GOP's version of Denis Kucinich.

Someone remind me again why Ron Paul’s not a conservative? . . . He has libertarian qualities, sure, and that’s what he’s usually classed as, but isn’t his attitude on foreign intervention the same or similar to Washington’s?

Please explain what you mean by "similar to Washington's". The first president, or the people in charge in the nation's capital ATTOW?

I'm trying to figure out what's so hard to understand about Paul's stance on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—he's utterly against them and wants them defunded. On top of that, he's extra weak on Iran, not supporting the resolution in support of the protests against the Mullahs (he was the sole "Nay" vote), opposing sanctions, and using scare tactics by claiming that Bush was going to attack Iran at any moment. He's weaker than even some of the DNC doves on the ~~global war on terror~~ "overseas contingency operation".

That's aside from his stance on Israel—he wants to withdraw support from the only democracy in the Middle East; he's in lock-step with the sicko dictators in the UN, and the two-faced European Union. He openly opposed the US supporting the Gaza blockade, in spite of how many lives it was saving, including Palestinian lives.

And he’s very much pro-life, with his personal experience as an obstetrician and gynecologist to back it up

As things look to me, he's pro-choice state by state; he only opposes federal funding for abortion. He also opposes a federal ban on abortion. A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways, yes?

If that doesn't clear things up for you, then perhaps you're not such an enemy of the "cryptocommunist Democratic Party" as you claim to be.

Someone remind me again why Ron Paul’s not a conservative? . . . He has libertarian qualities, sure, and that’s what he’s usually classed as, but isn’t his attitude on foreign intervention the same or similar to Washington’s?

Please explain what you mean by "similar to Washington's". The first president, or the people in charge in the nation's capital ATTOW?

I'm trying to figure out what's so hard to understand about Paul's stance on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—he's utterly against them and wants them defunded. On top of that, he's extra weak on Iran, not supporting the resolution in support of the protests against the Mullahs (he was the sole "Nay" vote), opposing sanctions, and using scare tactics by claiming that Bush was going to attack Iran at any moment. He's weaker than even some of the DNC doves on the ~~global war on terror~~ "overseas contingency operation".

That's aside from his stance on Israel—he wants to withdraw support from the only democracy in the Middle East; he's in lock-step with the sicko dictators in the UN, and the two-faced European Union. He openly opposed the US supporting the Gaza blockade, in spite of how many lives it was saving, including Palestinian lives.

And he’s very much pro-life, with his personal experience as an obstetrician and gynecologist to back it up

As things look to me, he's pro-choice state by state; he only opposes federal funding for abortion. He also opposes a federal ban on abortion. A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways, yes?

If that doesn't clear things up for you, then perhaps you're not such an enemy of the "cryptocommunist Democratic Party" as you claim to be.