looking for a "Real" Conservative?

Changing one's position on a political issue is not a 'lie'.

Saying that you are pledged to term limits and then turning your back on term limits is a lie.

And while "Bush lied" may be a fun slogan for the left, he actually hasn't lied.

At no point did I claim any of the troops to be failures.

Oh, of course not. They are losing and their effort is a "failure", according to you and your ilk, but somehow this isn't the same as calling them failures. You're just calling everything they've done a failure.

Spare me this mealymouthedness.

Oh goodie, a brave new world sort of guy. 'We're Americuh so it's going to work this time. Heeelll yeeeaaahhh!!' Yes the Brits and the French had those sorts as well during their incursions. I even imagine the Crusaders did during the Second and Third Crusades. How'd that go for them?

Translation: "America in the 21st century is no different from France in the 13th century."

You find American patriotism and optimism to be contemptible.

I do not. America can do any natural thing it sets its heart and mind to.

I'm not ashamed to take pride in my country and believe in it.

About not interfering in other peoples' business.

Not one of our Founding Fathers believed that American intervention in the world outside its borders was wrong. While this myth is popular among the uneducated, the very existence of the Monroe Doctrine and the words of the Federalist put paid to it.

Poor lad, admit it. That whole paragraph went right over your head didn't it?

I understand warmed-over Democrat fundraiser boilerplate. I just don't pay attention to it.

To reiterate:

Ron Paul is still a liar, he is still a backstabber and he is still a libertarian.

Your arguments:

(1) "Ron Paul isn't a liar, because other people have lied too."

(2) "Ron Paul isn't a backstabber because I agree with him about stabbing our troops in the back."

(3) "Ron Paul isn't a libertarian because Reagan used to be a Democrat."

Sad stuff.

And while "Bush lied" may be a fun slogan for the left, he actually hasn't lied.

LOL, Lord help you. Course he did. About Iraq? Don't know, don't care. But he has lied. In 2000 he promised, on the campaign stump, the federal government would stop its campaign against big tobacco. He had the capability to staff the Justice Dept accordingly to do so. But did he? Nope, he lied. I remember him saying return school control back to the local level. Did he? Nope, we've got Ted Kennedy's NCLB. Therefore that was a lie too. So I guess you're wrong. Bush lied. Does that mean since you knew about these changes you lied too?

What I find interesting is that that's all you've got to hang Paul on. He changed his position on term limits. Because you don't like him by default he lied. Course he didn't but you Republicans have become so pitiful in your arguments that's about all you've got.

They are losing and their effort is a "failure", according to you and your ilk, but somehow this isn't the same as calling them failures. You're just calling everything they've done a failure.

Me and my ilk? Careful, namecalling shows the weakness of your argument. I realize Republicans don't study history past the mid 1950s. If they did, they'd realize much of what's going on has gone on before. Again and again and again. And it's failed. Again and again and again. This is not to blame those on the ground. They're doing the best they can. But you simply can't fight historical fact

Translation: "America in the 21st century is no different from France in the 13th century."

Or 19th century Britain, or 20th century Britain. History continually repeats itself. Because we (collectively as a nation) believe we're somehow 'different' than the last time. And we continually try the same tactics.

You find American patriotism and optimism to be contemptible. I do not. America can do any natural thing it sets its heart and mind to. I'm not ashamed to take pride in my country and believe in it.

Ah here we go. Unless I support expansionist policies by default I must not be as patriotic as you. Hoo-rah!! Tell me do you have a certain amount of time I must wave the flag daily to meet your requirements too?

Not one of our Founding Fathers believed that American intervention in the world outside its borders was wrong.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.--George Washington
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.... She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit....--John Quincy Adams

Huh, well I guess these quotes are wrong then. Damn, and people have been taught them for years. Perhaps you should learn them as well

In 2000 he promised, on the campaign stump, the federal government would stop its campaign against big tobacco. He had the capability to staff the Justice Dept accordingly to do so. But did he? Nope, he lied.

Wow, this is thin gruel. I'll point out the following facts: (1) Since the President came into office, Justice has not entered into any new litigation initiatives against tobacco; (2) The Federal court system has struck down the attempt by states' attorneys general to make tobacco torts class actions; (3) every new civil litigation initiative against tobacco since President Bush took office has come from the states, not the Federal government; (4) he has uniformly appointed business-friendly judges who have spotless records when it comes to not harassing tobacco manufacturers.

He sure didn't lie on this issue at all - the trial lawyers are livid about this administration's attitude toward tobacco.

I remember him saying return school control back to the local level. Did he? Nope, we've got Ted Kennedy's NCLB.

What a bizarre argument.

The NCLB doesn't affect local control of schools at all. It is an act that makes federal funding available to schools - it doesn't diminish local control of schools.

The President didn't lie about this at all.

He changed his position on term limits.

He ran on a platform of term limits. That was one of the key ideas he preached about. It was central in his speeches and his campaign literature: it was his "thing." If a man walks away from a core position, does the exact opposite, and then acts like it never mattered, that betrays a fundamental lack of honesty.

This is not to blame those on the ground. They're doing the best they can.

Oh, of course. Our troops shouldn't be blamed for what you in your wisdom consider to be "failure" because, in your opinion, they just aren't good enough. The best they have to offer just isn't adequate.

Disgusting.

History continually repeats itself.

An often-repeated nostrum which is simply wrong. History does not repeat itself and it never has.

Do you get it? I do not buy into your Platonic/Hegelian/Marxian simplification of history. It's pat and it's demonstrably false.

Unless I support expansionist policies by default I must not be as patriotic as you. Hoo-rah!! Tell me do you have a certain amount of time I must wave the flag daily to meet your requirements too?

Yes, yes.

People who love their country unreservedly are benighted, naive, bourgeois. Refined gentlemen like yourself are far above such childish sentiments.

Idiots like myself are probably even gauche enough to have "Support Our Troops" ribbons on their cars, and worse - actually mean it! Philistines all.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations . . .

(1) George Washington was prescient and proven right again and again in warning Americans not to "implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of" Europe's politics.

George Washington was also intelligent enough to realize that the threat of global terrorism is (1) not part of the ordinary vicissitudes of Europe's internal politics and (2) if extending our commercial relations is indeed paramount, then terror is an enormous problem that must be confronted.

George Washington, also being an intelligent observer of current events in his day, would have noticed that the US has pressed on in the war against global terrorism by ignoring the ordinary vicissitudes and opinions of Europe's politics and pursuing its own policies despite the carping of France, Germany, the EU, etc.

Your quote from Washington underscores how silly your position is.

(2) John Quincy Adams, eight years old when the Declaration of Independence was signed, was hardly a Founding Father.

What he was, in general, was a bitter old crank whose father was a Founding Father.

The quote you cut-and-pasted, the favorite of knee-jerk anti-war losers, had an original context.

What was that context?

In 1821 the Latin American countries were busy trying to gain independence from Spain and Spain was losing its control over its territory despite its best military efforts. Some Americans thought it might be a good idea to jump in on the winning side. John Quincy Adams was adamant against this and gave the non-intervention speech you quote.

However, his boss James Monroe - an actual Founding Father who wintered in Valley Forge and was wounded in action at Trenton when little JQ Adams was taking violin lessons in Paris - overruled Adams' self-righteous speechifying two years later when he indicated to Spain and other powers that any further intervention by them in South America could be taken by the US as a provocation and grounds for US intervention.

Perhaps you should learn them as well

It's pretty clear that I have a much deeper understanding of them than you do, and I have only a rudimentary education in American history.

Here's a nice little list for you. These are documented, and yes one of them even applies to tobacco (just the buyouts, not his 2000 promise to back off the tobacco industry)

Bush Flip Flops

Please note, I am not advocating the site except to point out that politicians can change their minds. It is disingenous therefore to call Paul a 'liar'. But seeing that's all you've got, stick with it eh?

It's pretty clear that I have a much deeper understanding of them than you do, and I have only a rudimentary education in American history.

Believe what you will. I have quite a strong understanding of not only US history but Western European history going back to Alfred. Even took several classes in it. Why yes, I do believe I even have a degree in it. You see it takes more than weekly readings of the Weekly Standard and plopping your arse down nightly to listen to Sean Hannity religiously to have an understanding of what's going on in Iraq. The incursion into Iraq will fail. For reasons Paul and others have outlined time and again.

BTW, since you know Washington's words 'so well' you'll also remember what he said about putting one's faith into one party's leadership...

Here's a nice little list for you. These are documented

None of them are documented. In fact, some are just headlines that do not even proffer substantiating quotes. Some are attributions of "flip flopping" to the President, despite the fact that they cite Bush administration officials, instead of the President himself.

Paul Bremer is a big boy and made his own decisions - his changes of policy are not somehow lies told by the President.

It's a very shoddy list.

and yes one of them even applies to tobacco (just the buyouts, not his 2000 promise to back off the tobacco industry)

As I pointed out, your allegation about the President and the tobacco industry was completely false. Instead of admitting it, now you're trying to change the subject.

Please note, I am not advocating the site except to point out that politicians can change their minds.

What you are trying to do, since your strategy of making random accusations earlier didn't work, is to throw another 50 allegations dreamt up by some leftist loser at me to bury me in more of the same crapola - which you can now plausibly deny since you didn't write it.

It is disingenous therefore to call Paul a 'liar'. But seeing that's all you've got, stick with it eh?

Ron Paul ran for Congress on a "throw the bastards out" platform - and one of his key issues was that term limits were the only way to throw the bastards out and that he was going to make fighting for term limits his top priority. He also pledged to abide by his own term limits policy.

But he did not.

He completely abandoned something he had declared to be a core principle.

That speaks to character - and it is confirmed when he stabs American troops in the back.

My, my - what a surprise. Billbears is the President of the Billbears Fan Club.

Anyone can boast any credential they want on FR.

I'll point out one salient fact: you didn't even know that John Quincy Adams wasn't a Founding Father. I don't have a degree in American history and I knew that he was losing his baby teeth during the first Continental Congress.

You see it takes more than weekly readings of the Weekly Standard and plopping your arse down nightly to listen to Sean Hannity religiously to have an understanding of what's going on in Iraq.

(1) I have never read the Weekly Standard.

(2) I have never watched Sean Hannity for more than a few seconds before changing the channel - his entire affect annoys me, especially his tone of voice.

Regardless of these extranea, you have no more idea of what's going on in Iraq than anyone else with access to internet service and cable television.

The incursion into Iraq will fail. For reasons Paul and others have outlined time and again.

Yes, we know the reasons.

(1) America is actually France in the 1300s and that Kaiser Chiefs tune we hear on the radio is just an illusion - we're actually just listening to Guillaume de Machaut conducting motets at Verdun.

(2) Self-important toads like Ron Paul have no faith in our Armed Forces. They took a class in history in community college once and so they know exactly how all military and police engagements ever entered into will turn out.

BTW, since you know Washington's words 'so well' you'll also remember what he said about putting one's faith into one party's leadership...

A more salient point might be to inquire: what did the father of our country have to say about ingrates who abandoned all faith in their country?

You have, so you tell us, a degree in such matters. Tell us.

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.