Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/18/2012 5:18:08 AM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SJackson

He came across as a doddling old fool IMO. Shuffling along like Tim Conways character on Carol Burnett. Mumbling, fumbling idiot.


2 posted on 01/18/2012 5:20:28 AM PST by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

Ron Paul: Dangerously naive, cuckoo, and an intellect of magnificent desolation.


3 posted on 01/18/2012 5:20:46 AM PST by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

Yup. Another idiot whom I will never vote for if he gets the nomination.


4 posted on 01/18/2012 5:24:48 AM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

6 posted on 01/18/2012 5:46:07 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
Paul comes the closest to turning this debt thing around 14 trillion 16 trillion in debt, I don t think EVEN dr paul can turn it around. and It may be for the best that the fed government goes insolvent. I will see if i can dig it up but its said if we kept the current tax rate, no deductions and no new spending it would take 15 years to pay down the debt...that of course is if people continue to work, I don't see too many people wanting to go along with that.
9 posted on 01/18/2012 5:58:16 AM PST by 09Patriot (your freedom to be you, includes my freedom to be from you.--Wilkow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
Ron Paul is INSANE and so are his supporters.
(They're like the 60's drugged out, anti-war hippies, only with better hygiene)

And the RNC should get a court order ASAP to make Ron Paul stop using 'republican' to describe himself to the people. And to bar him from all 'Republican debates', and keep his name off all Republican primary election ballots.

He's a nutty Libertarian and should be running in that party, not the GOP. And he can have all the Libertarian debates he wants -- with himself!

Also, if his son, the honorable Senator Rand Paul, really cared for his father he'd have him declared legally incompetent and have him put away in some nice Home that has MDs & Nurses on staff, and a LOT of medications on hand.

10 posted on 01/18/2012 6:36:41 AM PST by Condor51 (Yo Hoffa, so you want to 'take out conservatives'. Well okay Jr - I'm your Huckleberry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

This has gotten to the point of beating a dead horse.
Most people that are NOT Paulbots and have some common sense already understand that Paul is a dangerous nutcase.


11 posted on 01/18/2012 6:44:48 AM PST by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

Ron Paul is the proverbial stopped clock, right twice a day.

As far as the Golden Rule goes, who is always first to offer assistance in times of disaster?


12 posted on 01/18/2012 6:47:14 AM PST by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
The current worldwide cultural struggle is between Secular Humanism and Islam. Secular Humanism is represented by our overwhelming but exorbitant military powers of the West. We are "winning hearts and minds", "spreading democracy", "nation building", "following the rules of engagement", "avoiding mosques", "surgically striking while trying to negotiate", in short, we are employing the "Golden Rule" strategy.

Let me be clear that we are not making naked pyramids or urinating on enemy, that would 10,000 times worse than My Lei. Many of our servicemen are Christians but they are not allowed to fulfill the Great Commission. They are not allowed to share their primitive gospel with anyone, because that would be more offensive than urinating on them.

Secular Humanism is doomed, it dead on it's feet. At worst, Ron Paul is right for the wrong reasons. Read Mark Steyn's "America Alone"

Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

13 posted on 01/18/2012 7:27:54 AM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

OK. I’m trying to figure out the point if this article. The author condemns Ron Paul and lays out a historical argument against Islam. This article is completely and utterly irrational in its argument. If not in the argument definitely in its lack of a conclusion.

What are we to conclude from this article or what is the author proposing? He cites Jefferson’s and Adam’s dealings with Islam. OK, thanks. Then suggests that Ron Paul (ie. the reader) read the passages taken from the Koran. OK, thanks again. Then a reference from a leading Egyptian scholar from the 50’s and 60’s. OK.

The author offers all of these historically documented instances and the impossibilities of dealing with Islam and Muslims but proffers nothing on what all of this means with regard to foreign policy. Should we stay in Afghanistan and do what we’re doing? Is he proposing we do unto others what we think they are trying to do to us? Is the argument that Islam at its core and that every muslim is wanting and willing to wage war at any cost, at anytime and in anyplace? If that is indeed where his argument points us, what does he propose? Waging war on all muslims in every part of the world no matter the cost because that’s what he thinks they want and are trying to do to us. I just don’t get where he is going with this.

If he was serious about looking at this from a historical perspective then he wouldn’t be proposing taking it to the muslims, at this point he should be asking what the hell are we still doing in the muslim world trying to reform it?

We don’t live in the muslim world. If we were serious about stopping this stuff it’s really not that hard. We (our military) come home, the terrorists stay there. If we think so and so is sending terrorists here, then don’t let them on a plane to come here. What are they going to do row here? If someone from so and so country has business to conduct, then do it over the phone or internet. If you’re legitimate, sorry, until you and your country get your affairs in order, no entry. You’re losing money by not being able to come to the U.S., sorry. Effect change at home to earn the privilege of coming here. No one has an inherent right to travel here. We need to govern ourselves and let them govern themselves. If they CHOOSE to let extreme religious beliefs guide them, fine, but we choose to not have it affect us. If and when we are serious we can get serious really quickly. We just have to have the will to do it. Is it “fair?” No. Is it fair that some would choose perpetuate terror? No. Do we need to change course? Yes.

To be charitable, Klein is offering nothing more than hyperbole regarding the golden rule statement from Paul.


14 posted on 01/18/2012 8:24:38 AM PST by TheDude33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

I wonder why Switzerland doesn’t get any terrorist attacks. After all, they’re infidels too.


15 posted on 01/18/2012 8:28:55 AM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
An interesting, if irrelevant, line of attack. Why don't you see how Jefferson actually handled foreign policy, as Secretary of State & later President. He responded to the Barbary Pirates attack by sending a frigate, carrying a company of Marines. They engaged a Barbary Cruiser, preying on our shipping. The Marines borded the Cruiser, slaughtered most of its crew. But then, Jefferson who favored a policy similar to the one Ron Paul advocates, gave the local leader, back the ship--I think more as an object lesson, than anything else. Jefferson would have applauded Ron Paul's approach.

Dr. Paul's foreign policy is the one for which Washington argued in his Farewell Address. Note, that the Washington argument was not based upon anything peculiar to his time or any other time. It was based upon psychological effects, both on us & others, from the attitudes that Dr. Paul tries to avoid. Consider the argument from a Washingtonian perspective, for once: Pseudo Pragmatism.

You will note that my argument does not name any candidates. My hope is to urge whomever is the Republican nominee against Obama, to avoid the sort of hysterical ranting which causes problems, as well as alienates potential supporters.

William Flax

17 posted on 01/18/2012 8:54:56 AM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson
It isn't Ron Pual I have the most concern for, its his followers/supporters. They seem to have the idea that Ron Pual is almost like a messiah, who if we just elect him, all this country's problems will be solved. Very much the same thing happened with Ross Perot's followers/supporters, and look where that got us: President Bill Clinton. Ron Pual’s supporters seem to be hoping that just by electing him, that everything will be solved and we will just be able to go back and enjoy the good life, and everyone in the world will love us.
19 posted on 01/18/2012 10:52:33 AM PST by fatherofthree (Ron Pual's supporters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

Dear Mr. Klien the Iraq war was a total boondoggle that cost over 5,000 American lives and over 100,000 Iraqi lives. This war was based on Iraq having WMD’s which was refuted by non other than secretary of state Colin Powell on the late Tim Russert show. Paraphrasing Powell’s comments,’the US was given false intelligence about WMD and in some cases deliberately’. Interestingly enough there was no media followup on what should have been one of the top stories of the decade. In addition and Israeli general who worked for the secret Israeli intellgence divisiion stated in an AP interview that Israel overstated its assertion on Iraqs having WMD. Also we had an inspector come back from Iraq also verifying this false assertion on WMD. Maybe Mr. Paul isn’t so crazy after all.


26 posted on 01/18/2012 7:16:10 PM PST by doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson; RaceBannon

Yeah, because advocating “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is such a crazy, silly and absurd moral rule! I mean, who would teach such a thing??? Let’s boo the Golden Rule! And let’s return hate with more of the same! Now that’s a better moral teaching. /sarcasm


28 posted on 01/28/2012 1:35:05 AM PST by incindiary (Truth is treason in the empire of lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson