I think the answer is obvious. Someone as kooky as he is....
Posted on 01/22/2008 2:07:21 AM PST by GovernmentIsTheProblem
Most of the other candidates are out of money.
Soon it will be only Romney, McCain, and Paul.
The time is coming for them to pick their VP picks. I am willing to bet the first might happen before Super Tuesday in an attempt to get a bump.
The buzz I have heard is around the following potential picks
Mark Sanford, Gary Johnson, Judge Andrew Napolitano, John Stossel
Of them all, I think that Judge Napolitano would be the best pick, from a pure ticket perspective.
I know his foreign policy isn't popular on FR and this post will likely attract a lot of noise from a handful of people dedicated to shouting the Doctor down.
However - he is a Republican candidate, he has the funds to go until the RNC, and it will be time to announce his VP pick soon. Before anyone suggests it, it's not going to be Kucinich. ;)
So think about this - he is the only candidate left in the race (assuming Fred drops out later today, which he likely is doing), Paul is the only candidate left that is anti-amnesty, pro-2nd amendment, anti-abortion, and for limiting the size and scope of government.
Like I said - I'm hoping it's the Doctor and the Judge.
Anyone else hearing any noise?
R911, let's not stoop to their level - we're (you're) better than that. I know from your freepmail that you're getting frustrated with our detractors here at FR, but remember, Paul's opponents have to resort to personal attacks and insults, because that's all they got. We're backing the best man for the job. Let's advocate him in the manner that he would want us to.
jmc813, I hope your guy stays in - he's the best guy running who's name ain't Ron Paul, and he's still got a much better chance of getting the nomination than Paul does. But if he does drop out, please consider Dr. Paul. Do some real research into the man, his policies and ideas... you may disagree with some, but remember, all of the other candidates will take us further down the same path this country has been on for a good while now. Fred may go a little slower than hillary, but the destination will be the same. Do you really want that?
It takes an enormous, expensive and intrusive government to fight, occupy and police the planet. I do not believe that we can be a free people with that kind of power concentrated in DC. So I ask myself, "are a bunch of 7th century goat-herding cult members really a bigger threat to my life, liberty and property than the fedgov is?" The answer I come up with is no (actually, hell no!).
Government must be brought back under control in this country, or it's finished. That thinking lead me right to the good Doctor. I hope it leads you to him too.
Did he name Schweiker in JANUARY? Either way, we can see clearly what it got both Reagan and Schweiker. Wishing for the remaining candidates to pick their VPs now (or "soon") truly is a vanity.
No need to consider, I'm already there. I've been a fan of his for years, but disagreed with him too much on foreign policy for him to be higher than my #4 guy when the GOP race started, behind Fred, Hunter and Tancredo. Now that they're all out, Ron's my man. If he drops, jmc goes third-party.
Just for grins......
Total votes 1,693,073 100% Delegates Thompson 121,259 7.16% 11 Paul 106,171 6.27% 8
Paul with 6.27% of the total vote so far and 8 delegates isn't exactly setting the field on fire now is it?.
Now you have a nice day.....
Paul hasn't named anybody so far, moot point.
Indidentally, would we have had primaries in JANUARY back then?
Either way, we can see clearly what it got both Reagan and Schweiker.
It got Reagan elected in 1980 by a landslide. Schweiker never planned to run for re-election to the senate, and became SEC HHS under Reagan. So, yeah, it worked out pretty well.
The country had to experience a Jimmy Carter to appreciate that "Voodoo economics" Ron wasn't so crazy after all.
Welcome aboard the revolution, my FRiend. I wish I could assure you of a successful journey, but I don't think that's going to happen.
If Paul had never gotten into this thing, Fred would have been my second choice, after Tancredo. I think the 3rd-world invasion is the biggest threat to the nation, even over out of control gov't, for the simple reason that 3rd world marxist peasants will never vote to eliminate the welfare state. The welfare/warfare state must go, in order to restore the Republic. Combine the votes of the invaders with the votes of our indigenous liberals, and it may already be too late. Tancredo would have tried to do something about that.
The problem I had with your guy Fred is that, in my opinion, the absolute best we could have hoped for out of him was another Reagan. We need more than that. As much as I liked Reagan, I agree with Dr. Paul - his two terms weren't that successful. He left the fedgov bigger, more intrusive and expensive than it was when he took office. He gets credit for the fall of communism, but with the direction events have taken since then, I'm starting to miss the cold war.
As far as Paul's foreign policy goes, I agree with it completely. We need a national defense, nothing more. Paul supports that. I think that, under him, we'd have an air defense system that was lacking on 9-11 (and still is), we'd have a ballistic-missle defense system that could defend against more than a couple of missiles, and we'd have secure borders. Combine that with a strong Navy, Marine Corps and a massive strategic nuclear arsenal, and what more do you need?
As a rule, you're off my reply-to list, because you are incapable of polite, rational discourse.
However, rules are made to be broken, and this one's too easy.
Reasons 9-11 went down like it did -
- Fedgov failure to control who enters and stays in country.
- Fedgov failure to act on intel that muslims were learning to fly commercial airliners, but not how to land (too busy with prostitution stings and drug busts)
- Fedgov disarming of pilots.
- Fedgov indoctrination of airliner passengers to not resist hijacking.
- Fedgov failure to provide stand-by air defense coverage of US.
You'll notice that a non-interventionalist foreign policy had nothing to do with 9-11 (we haven't had one of those in my lifetime, anyway).
No, thanks. Ron Paul and his cult seem clueless.
Who's clueless?
BTW, don't forget to thank me for my service to the country... after all, not a single 9-11 took place on my watch (1980-84), and it was the Commies I was holding off, not a bunch of goat-herders
you didnt answer my question
I think the answer is obvious. Someone as kooky as he is....
Actually, you'd be dead. Blackbird.
“Well at least Thompson knows when to pack it in and that he’s not gonna win. You guys keep pushing your hard earned cash to the loser. He’ll make good use of it in his race to keep his CD seat for he has already proven he can’t win the presidency, reme’
Fred packed it in because he was out of cash.
Fred is out. Huck is about out. Rudy might drop before Florida.
Soon it will be just Mitt, McQueeg, and Paul.
“Who will Ron Paul pick for his VP? (vanity)”
Is he going to be running a third party campaign?
you didnt answer my question
Soon it will be just Mitt, McQueeg, and Paul.
Is he going to be running a third party campaign?
Could he be the president and the VP?
“If he’s running as a candidate in the General it will be as a 3rd party losing effort.”
Well I understand that and that was my point, who does this guy think he is picking Veeps’ at this point unless he is planning a third party run?
Not only that, she hangs around with geriatric sluts!
BTW, don't forget to thank me for my service to the country
Thank you for your service!
Ron Paul is still a nutcase, though.
Kucinich as VP!
Good post, I agree.
I was for Tancredo, but now I’m supporting Paul.
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.