Posted on 01/13/2012 7:26:17 PM PST by mnehring
Most people already know that Ron Paul refused to endorse John McCain in the 2008 general election. While I don’t necessarily agree with that decision, especially from a contender for the GOP nominee, I can certainly understand it. Lord knows I hated every nice thing I had to say about John McCain and wasn’t entirely pleased about pulling the lever for him (which is a dramatic understatement). Most people assume that Paul endorsed Libertarian candidate Bob Barr in 2008, which is partially true. However, that is not the entire story. Paul also endorsed three other candidates.
The first of those was Chuck Baldwin. I don’t really know a lot about Baldwin except that he has been on record early and often in support of the proposition that the South should have won the Civil War. This sort of thing would ordinarily disqualify most normal people from endorsing Chuck Baldwin, but Ron Paul is not most normal people. And given what most Ron Paul supporters seem willing to forgive, a little Confederate sympathy (or even a lot of Confederate sympathy) seems like small potatoes.
The second was Cynthia McKinney. Yes, you read that correctly, Ron Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney in 2008. For those who do not know, Cynthia McKinney is a certifiably insane anti-American anti-Semitic lunatic. She first came to widespread public attention when she was arrested for punching out a member of the capitol police who tried to stop her when she wasn’t wearing her pin. Cynthia McKinney is so crazy that she got defeated in a primary by a guy who thought Guam might tip over and capsize. McKinney was once arrested by the Israelis while trying to give aid to Hamas and penned a bizarre anti-American and anti-Israeli screed. See more of her anti-Americanism here.
Now, I know that the above is not necessarily persuasive to the average Ron Paul fan – after all, if they were bothered by siding with terrorists, they’d have probably jumped off the Paul bandwagon already. What is perhaps more important is that Cynthia McKinney is also next door to being a communist in terms of her domestic policy. McKinney is an open and avowed enemy of free market capitalism, preferring instead Ghadaffi-style socialism. Seriously, she literally and openly favors dictatorial socialism. McKinney ran on the Green Party ticket, whose platform explicitly includes guaranteed open-ended welfare (at a living wage) for everyone regardless of their ability or willingness to work, among other quasi-communist and far-left economic policies.
The fourth and final candidate Ron Paul endorsed for President was Ralph Nader. Yes, the same Ralph Nader who was so far to the left on economic matters that he could see no difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush. The same Ralph Nader who also longs for the day when the last vestiges of capitalism have died in America. Nader, you remember was the guy who made running as the Green Party candidate famous.
Why, you might ask, would Ron Paul, champion of economic freedom and limited government, endorse two avowed socialists for President? Well, you see, they signed a document:
Paul will offer this open endorsement to the four candidates because each has signed onto a policy statement that calls for “balancing budgets, bring troops home, personal liberties and investigating the Federal Reserve,” the Paul aide said.
You see, despite a lengthy and public history of supporting massive government expansion and infringement upon personal liberties, and despite running on a party platform that explicitly calls for the massive expansion of Government welfare, these people would clearly have been better at shrinking the government than the Republicans on the basis of signing this absurd pledge. To be fair, Paul was probably just following the Golden Rule here – after all, Paul had just spent the last two years being a truther in front of truthers and denying trutherism in front of the media, so he doubtless was extending the sort of blind eye towards Nader and McKinney’s insanity that he wished everyone else would turn towards his.
For whatever his failings as a Presidential candidate and conservative (and they were legion), no reasonable person would say that John McCain was worse than any of these clowns. It was one thing for Paul to not endorse McCain – but we have to ask what sort of person affirmatively supports anti-American avowed socialists and confederate sympathizers over a Republican? The answer: Someone who, like Howard Dean, hates Republicans and everything they stand for.
We must embrace Paul Pot! /s
Jeez we are screwed.
Obama, Romney or Paul Pot?
Was he “spot on” in his decades of vile newsletters? Was he spot on praising traitors, blaming the uS for 9/11, and wanting to gut the military? How about allowing Iran to get nukes, is he spot on there? And spot on pandering to Occupy parasites, conspiracy nut shoes, and drug users and abuser?
Ron Paul supporters are loyal to the US Constitution, Paul is the only game in town. RINOs and CINOs need not apply.
He’s a nut
Paul and McKinney is bad. But not as bad as Paul teaming up with Barney Fag to push for the legalization of dope.
The reasons to reject RoPaul and his anti-conservatives values are limitless.
Code Pink Endorses Ron Paul
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2831968/posts
Ron Paul does, says, and votes, any way HE sees fit, and then he claims he is doing so because of the Constitution.
The man is a fraud who supports flaming liberals, frequently.
The man is a kook who once wrote that AIDS was a US Germ Warfare experiment gone bad, hangs with and speaks to 9-11 “Truthers” and has many other crack-pot ideas.
Ron Paul is an idiot, he is mentally unstable, and he is a hate-filled anti-Semite.
“It was one thing for Paul to not endorse McCain – but we have to ask what sort of person affirmatively supports anti-American avowed socialists and confederate sympathizers over a Republican? The answer: Someone who, like Howard Dean, hates Republicans and everything they stand for.”
Well worded. Excellent.
FURP!!!!
Paul is not a conservative.
Paul is not logical.
Paul is to the constitution in the same way Fred Phelps is to the Bible.
Best post ever on a Ron Paul thread, Bravo!
” - - - As Thomas Paine said “Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.”
Thanks for bringing the above quote into the conversation. There are a lot of thought parts to his 3 sentence quote.
For example, with Presidential Candidates and their ideas that “are not YET sufficiently fashionable,” I think back to Barry Goldwater’s quote: “You can’t legislate Morality.”
He received a lot of cheap, verbal abuse for that statement back then, (yes I am that old), but today we are shocked that any non-lib would not accept his quote as inherently true.
The libs are still locked into their time warp where they still produce a “formidable outcry in defense of custom.” The custom of social engineering.
Each of our mighty 6-pack Republican has one or more ideas that are worth considering to become planks in the Republican Party Platform that is handed to the Nominee.
BTW, what if none of the 6-pack will be allowed by the GOP ? What if the Tampa GOP Convention chooses a Dark Horse as it’s Nominee? Wouldn’t it be a shame if all the best 6-pack ideas were rejected too?
Let us separate the best ideas from all the Candidates, and play to win with the best ideas, and the best people, just like in football.
Paul is an anti-Semite, racist, isolationist.
Paul is to the constitution as Fred Phelps is to the Bible.
You have been supplied over and over and over again the information to show you your view of who you think Paul is just wrong, what I can’t figure out is how you just don’t get it.
Well, yes. The other R candidates would do well to embrace the best of what Paul has to offer. To me anyway, Newt and the rest all sound like Bob Dole retreads.
There's a reason so many young folks, and so many in the military, back Paul. He is boldly different.
I'm not a Paul supporter myself, but I do see value in many of his ideas.
BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can't imagine why there was no support for McCain, by the old man or anyone...... ~~
Oh yeah....I like it.
Why doesn’t he attack Romney?
Your loyalty to an old leftist hippie like Paul is sickening.
His record speaks for itself. He is not loyal to the Constitution. You Paultards are like the Donald Trump wacko’s who swallowed the Trump BS.
I don’t doubt for a minute that The Donald is not watching the crapola that Trump is getting away with and thinking to himself; “Now why didn’t I think of that?”
Truth be told... I have greater respect for Weasel-hair than I do RoPaul.
By way of comparison, McCain is a totalitarian tyrant.
He forgot.
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.