Posted on 01/09/2008 8:54:49 AM PST by connell
Leave. Just go.
Mr. Paul, you are NOT a Republican. You may have views that intersect with some aspects of the Republican platform. That does NOT make you a Republican.
The Republican Party is a big tent movement. We don't apply nearly the same strictness when it comes to tests of ideological purity as the Democrats do, but we still have some standards. And you, sir, do not even come close to meeting them.
People who blame America for the acts of war made against it are not Republicans.
People who think that we blew up our own buildings on 9/11...or who hint that we might have...or who attract the support of people with such beliefs...are not Republicans.
People who may be receiving secret funding from George Soros...and who certainly receive energy and succor from radical leftists...are not Republicans.
People who have become the darling of, and the recipient of support from, America's neo-Nazis and white supremacists---and who refuse to openly repudiate that support---are not Republicans.
And people who publish racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-American newsletters...are not Republicans.
Oh, and your protestations of innocence regarding this racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American newsletter to which you attached your name are absurd. As Jonah Goldberg said yesterday on the Michael Medved show, if...
(Excerpt) Read more at modernconservative.com ...
I doubt it. Paul would pull more from the Dems than from the Republicans. He's pretty popular with Code Pink, et al.
If you don't enjoy my posts, you support the terrorists. Truth.
Would you mind if I threw this...
You need to either get a life or a psychologist.
...on the "Comments From Fans" section of my freeper profile page?
One day vs. 10 years. That is not an insignificant difference.
And being pro-abortion is not a 'questionable social belief', how about being for 'homosexual rights'?
I guess we need to get rid of the entire RINO wing of the GOP, including those who support them.
Fiscally, yes.
Otherwise... he’s a fruit loop.
BTW, I have never witnessed such hysterical shrieking about racism homophobia and anti-semitism since I peeked in on DU.
You sound about as conservative a community college sociology professor from Brooklyn.
Do you know why he voted no to that?
Because the military would be doing police work, not military functions.
None of that is anything but your own personal opinion. It is not recognized fact.
I've never mentioned the name in this thread.
If it’s valid to accuse the dems of embracing a racist then it’s valid to accuse the republicans of the same.
The Democrats embraced racism prior to the Civil War (and after). It's part of their history. It goes far beyond their acceptance of one (or any) individual. The comparison isn't valid.
The main point to ALL of this is that unless one seeks to associate with racists or actually writes/says racist things themself, it isn’t fair to attach guilt by association.
I would agree, but my point above shows the Democrats go far beyond 'guilt by association'.
I am certainly open to learning more about this whole deal as I didn’t know about it until today. If Paul did endorse these things (with years and years of them being published without his objection it very well may be true) then I’d have to consider him a political leper and avoid him. Until that is proven though I’m going to consider it a smear job.
I understand that. And that's a very good stance. But the Paul campaign has to do more to offset these claims beyond blanket denials. The New Republic, as detestable as they are on this forum, has provided evidence in the form of documents. The Paul campaign has to provide something of equal weight.
Well put.
What military functions can the military perform, when they are all penned up inside the U.S.?
Isn't pulling all of the U.S. military out of overseas bases a central plank in the Ron Paul platform?
Oh, please. What strict standards of ideological purity would have Zell Miller and Dennis Kucinich in the same party at the same time?
It's a good idea to draw sharp contrasts between the parties, but let's be honest about it. Play it straight.
Imagine that, pretty pathetic
They like to call themselves tolerant, only as long as they can define what is acceptable.
You: If you don't enjoy my posts, you support the terrorists. Truth.
Would you mind if I threw this...
That's stupid. Your posts are about syntax and grammar. So it makes me a terrorist supporter if I think your posts are stupid? Yeah right. Go ahead and post that and I'll have you for breakfast, jerk.
...on the "Comments From Fans" section of my freeper profile page?
This makes no sense. Get of the booze of whatever you're on. It does you no good.
If so, then why are a steady stream of anti-WW II articles still staple fare on the Rockwell site? I'm talking about articles claiming that Pearl Harbor was "America's fault" (for embargoing oil shipments to Tojo after the Rape of Nanking) and claiming that Adolf Hitler was Europe's problem alone, posing no threat to America. I'm talking about tearjerkers that run every year on the anniversary dates of Dresden and Hiroshima claiming that the US gratuitously attacked civilian populations for no particular reason.
The Rockwellites are also against the defensive war we're in right now. This position is NOT just the "Iraq was unnecessary" line we hear from the Democrats. The Rockwelites believed that 9/11 itself was America's fault and that we had no right to retaliate in any way, including in Afghanistan right after 9/11 itself. This stems from the Rockwellite core belief that because the South should have won the Civil War, all American activities after that have been by definition illegitimate and that we deserve to be conquered by any enemy, including Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden, who has the military strength to attack us.
I've never said other candidates don't have views outside of conservative values.
I guess we need to get rid of the entire RINO wing of the GOP, including those who support them.
That's an idea. But it doesn't mean we have to embrace someone who seems associated with antisemitic, Truther, and neo-nazi dogma.
You are getting Big Government because of the racist hate groups, since that is the basis for 'hate crime' legislation.
Soon it will be considered 'hate speech' to denounce homosexuality from the pulpits.
It is indeed amazing how 'PC' many of the posters on FR have become.
Ummm, if you don't like my posts you support the terrorists?
Get of the booze of whatever you're on.
Of –preposition 1. (used to indicate distance or direction from, separation, deprivation, etc.): within a mile of the church; south of Omaha; to be robbed of one's money.
Off –adverb 1. so as to be no longer supported or attached: This button is about to come off.
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.