Posted on 02/12/2011 10:25:48 AM PST by OldDeckHand
Given the contentious relationship between his followers and many in the conservative movement, it’s safe to say that Rep. Ron Paul’s address to CPAC this year was one of the more anticipated speeches of the political holiday weekend. And Rep. Paul delivered: railing against the “neo-Jacobins” that passed the PATRIOT Act, calling for drastic cuts in military spending, and a passionate repudiation of the Federal Reserve.
Opening with a jubilant recognition of the results of last November’s midterms– and, especially, the election of his son Rand to the Senate– the tenor of Paul’s speech was mostly combative towards the more military wing of the American right than anyone else. “We’ve given up our devotion to liberty,” Paul lamented, appreciating that, while the PATRIOT Act was now history, the fact that it passed at all was infuriating enough. “The PATRIOT Act has nothing to do with patriotism– they always name it the opposite of what it is,” he quipped. “The PATRIOT Act is literally the destruction of the Fourth Amendment.”
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
James 3:10
Osamabama will soon deliver many times more than you will earn in your lifetime to his Mob in egypt. How does that make you feel? Me..I don’t like it.
“We can’t build a safer world with honorable intentions and good will alone. Achieving the fundamental goals our nation seeks in world affairs - peace, human rights, economic progress, national independence and international stability - means supporting our friends and defending our interests.”
“Americans seek always to make friends of old antagonists.”
“When we’ve taken up arms, it has been for the defense of freedom for ourselves and for other peaceful nations who needed our help.”
“While other [military] alliances have been formed to win wars, our fundamental purpose is to prevent war while preserving and extending the frontiers of freedom.”
“Young Americans must never again be sent to fight and die unless we are prepared to let them win.”
“Yes, the cost is high, but the price of neglect would be infinitely higher.”
“With our eyes fixed on the future, but recognizing the realities of today...we will achieve our destiny to be as a shining city on a hill for all mankind to see.”
President Ronald Wilson Reagan
Oh no, we espouse quotes and stick our damn nose into everyone elses business cause good lord knows we got right here at home......
I am against Foreign Aid period we are broke.
Ron Paul’s blame-America-and-Israel-first, let-the-rest-of-the-world-hang, foreign policy ideas are immoral.
That is EXACTLY what the Islamo Fascists and the Iran based Caliphate want us to do. Let me ask you this; How secure will your "Fortress America" be after the Islamists take most of Europe and the Middle East? Also, after they acquire nuclear weapons and a delivery system, will they learn that their new found destructive power, somehow requires them to become Pragmatic? Your twisted logic is not only short sighted, it is fatal......
Would you rather expend dollars or, ultimately, the blood of American servicemen?
In Washington’s day, there were the Atlantic & Pacific Oceans, and they were vast. With today’s modes of travel and technology, they are now just about the Atlantic & Pacific Lakes. Washington would have to take a couple of weeks to come up to speed if he were to come back; then he would, as wise men do, alter some of his thinking accordingly.
Neither.
Paul and the paulbots do not care what Reagan thought or said. They are like ostriches. They put their heads in the sand and think that if we do nothing we will be safe. They do not realize that there are dangers in the world, and that showing that we will not defend ourselves will only make those dangers greater.
well you know what... focus on the home front clamp down on borders and realize the freaking world hates us and we prolly stand a better chance than sticking our damn nose in their business.
Except he didn’t.
“The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest... A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification.”
Supporting our allies is not sticking our nose in their business. It is supporting our allies.
Maybe if we had understood where suppporting a corrupt tyrrant was going, or maybe if the CIA had had a clue how much trouble the Shah was in, we might have been able to do something a bit different.
But I have to say I really resonate with your idea of getting into Iran after the Shah fell and trying to fix the place with everyone hating us. That would have turned out brilliantly, I am sure. [let me add a sarcasm tag here for those who missed it.]
This is a question as old as humanity. Cain asked the question of God, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”
If a mob is burning, looting, raping, and killing your neighbors, yes, you can turn a blind eye and barricade your own door. But...
1. That’s immoral. You have God-given obligations to your fellow men.
2. You have then given over the wider world to the forces of evil and isolated yourself.
3. Eventually, they will figure out how to knock down your door, too.
This is just reality in a fallen world in which evil is an active force. Either decent, liberty-loving people hang together, or we shall most certainly all hang separately.
I would bet with a good commercial mailing list you could reduce the suspect problem population to a few hundred to concentrate on. Of course then you would not have needed DHS and TSA and all the wonderful things that have happened to our economy by the drastic increase in federal spending associated therewith.
Washington said a LOT more in his farewell speech than that partial sentence that a lot of people like to quote out of context. If you read the full speech, he specifically was referring to the war between Spain and Great Britain which, as he put it “could disturb our union” because, as he also put it, “continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire”. He in the same speech, however, he also reinforced the need to honor foreign treaties and, going back to the original quote, we had treaties at the time with both and he was keeping our union from splitting taking different sides in that war.
Too often that is taken very far out of context to make a point that Washington didn’t intend to make in the least.
Allies???? your kidding right? saudia arabia, Iraq, turkey, afghanistan,Yemen, etc.... wake up.
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.