>>>Let’s brush the foam off the beer or do whatever the equivalent may be for the marijuana. <<<
Well, that explains your incoherent rant. Frankly BlackElk, this is the most beligerent piece of bullshit I have read in a long time.
>>>I know Tom Woods through Catholic Traditionalist circles and he should be ashamed of himself supporting that lying fraud and pipsqueak from Galveston. <<<
I’m sure Tom would feel likewise about you, if he read this craziness.
>>>The Texas GOP has finally brought a long national nightmare to a conclusion by cutting off his escape hatch and taking this year’s redistricting opportunity to abolish his district.<<<
I see. The Texas Rockefellars are pushing out the one constitutionalist from the state because, aghast, his constituents insist on voting for him, time and time again. His constituents are probably just a bunch of low-life, sloped-foreheaded trailer trash, and who cares about them, right?
>>>See paleoPaulie CLAIM to be pro-life and pro-family while extending the big wink, wink to his gullible Ron Paul Youth.<<<
That is very observant of you. The doctor who has delivered more than 4,000 babies, and has claimed for decades that he believes that human life starts at conception, and that casual elimination of the unborn leads to a careless attitude towards all life, can’t fool you, right? The fellow who, on Hannity, argued that his pro-life position was consistent with his libertarian values, and asked, “If you can’t protect life then how can you protect liberty”, can’t fool you, right? Of course his argument that libertarians (who support non-aggression) should oppose abortion because abortion is “an act of aggression” against a fetus, is just plain bogus, right? And of course his argument that the ninth and tenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion, but gives power over the matter to the states, is merely a backdoor legalization scheme, right? (wait, abortion is already legal, so scratch that one).
>>>...having served the MSM’s purpose by making a case that George McGovern’s craven foreign policy and that of Neville Chamberlain somehow survive in the GOP because he can get some bunch of largely left-wing college peace creeps who share his libertoonian disdain for national legislation...<<<
Yea, the fellow who claims he will continue his efforts to secure our borders, hunt down the 9/11 terrorist planners (who are still at large), safely withdraw our troops from Iraq and other countries around the world, and finally overhaul the intelligence apparatus in cooperation with intelligence professionals rather than political opportunists, is just another Chamberlain-type appeaser, right? The fellow who follows the same foreign policy as George Washington (Farewell Address) and Thomas Jefferson (1st Inaugural), is a foreign policy McGovernite, right? The fellow who Ronald Reagan said was “...one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country”, is weak on national defense, right? The fellow who said, “There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today... we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we’re acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapons”, is a foreign policy wimp, right?
>>>I was a Reagan state chairman when he bucked Ford and I bet you weren’t.<<<
Wow! I’m impressed!
>>>I was a state chair of YAF, YRs, and CRs and I bet you weren’t.<<<
Wow! I’m even more impressed!
>>>What REALLY ticks me off about paleoPaulie and his libertarian stooges is his hypocrisy in claiming to be pro-family and pro-life while hiding behind the 10th Amendment to justify DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING while SCOTUS and the fedcourts impose their barbarian social policies on all fifty states, 50+ million babies are sliced, diced and hamburgerized and marriage (the actual kind) is mocked.<<<
I repeat myself, but the doctor who has delivered more than 4,000 babies, and has claimed for decades that he believes that human life starts at conception, and that casual elimination of the unborn leads to a careless attitude towards all life, can’t fool you, right? If you only have one vote amongst 435 members of the house, you should march right in, declare yourself dictator, and ban abortion.
>>>I am none too fond of his foreign policy of institutionalized national cowardice either or his habit of lying that he is a “fiscal conservative” while packing Galveston pork into each budget.<<<
Yea, he should let Obama spend all that money that is budgeted on Obama’s union and other leftist buddies. Screw Ron Paul’s unimportant constituents. So what if all spending is budgeted prior to a single earmark being attached, and all budgeted money that is not earmarked is given to Obama and his buddies in the executive to spend as they see fit.
>>>We need not and ought not to nation build.<<<
That is Ron Paul’s stated position, was G.W.’s position (initially), and I believe the GOP 2000 position. Of course Ron Paul only pretends to agree with you.
>>>Interventionism means maintaining a strong military, second-to-none and far more powerful than any other AND being ready, willing and able to use that military when the USA and ONLY the USA determines to do so. Any other nation can join under our military management or not a they see fit. We need no UN, no NATO (the Cold War is over), no other diployak alliances and no “rules of engagement” to hamstring our military.<<<
That is dangerously close to what Ron Paul believes. Maybe you should rethink your position, because it is a fact he will not rethink his.
>>> can also tell you that Tom Woods is misconstruing John Flynn, an honorable conservative and editor of my boyhood hometown newspaper The New Haven Register, solidly conservative and then some under John Day Jackson’s ownership. Mr. Flynn, having shamed himself by being a big shot in the America First Committee, went to Chicago on the very day after Pearl Harbor and, with McCormack and Lindbergh and others, folded America First’s tent and joined in support of WW II. Flynn and John Day Jackson ran a simply great newspaper. I am unaware of any relapse into pacifism by Flynn thereafter.<<<
Woods does not mention Flynn’s position of interventionism during the interview. He only mentioned Flynn because Lord labeled Flynn an anti-semite and Paul (must be) an anti-semite due to Paul’s recommendation of Flynn’s book. Woods wasn’t buying that Flynn was anti-semite. To the contrary.
Here’s Tom Woods (by himself) on John T. Flynn, Jeffrey Lord, and Ron Paul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YpP80_J5N8
BTW, Have you read Flynn’s book “The Roosevelt Myth”? I have one of the earlier editions (my wife inherited it).
>>>The eccentric old coot is now about 76 years old, claims to be a “fiscal conservative” while stuffing each budget with tons of Galveston pork to be passed by his colleagues along with their own pork while Paulie poses for holy pictures and voting no. <<<
I discussed this previously, but I will repeat: the budget is passed before a single earmark is included. All earmarks fall within the budget. No earmark adds a single penny to the budget. All money not earmarked goes to the Executive to spend anyway it pleases. So, if Paul does not earmark some of the budget for his constitutents, it goes to Obama to be spent on his union buddies and leftist cronies. Ron is correct when he states there is no earmark problem, only a spending problem. He is only one man, in a sea of hucksters (GOP and Democrat alike), who love both earmarks and an increasingly fat budget. If Paul could reduce spending, he would.
Anyway, if that is what you want—that Obama gets more money for his crushing left-wing regulations and to prop up his union friends, then you are no friend of this country. Now do you understand?
>>>Rand Paul, unlike his crazy father, shows some degree of promise so far. If Rand is to have a career in leadership, his father must, as fatally damaged goods, recede into a well-deserved obscurity.<<<
If Ron Paul is damaged goods, it is because of arrogant, foolish, no-nothing party hacks like you.
OTOH, I am certainly interested in any resume you may claim as to actual accomplishments of yours as a conservative and not just that you supported the Galveston sewer rat. I doubt that I will see it because your resume of actual conservative accomplishments is likely to be what mathematicians call a null set, i.e. containing zero, zip, nada. Let's see what you've got and if we don't see it, then you cannot blame us for arriving at the reasonable conclusion that there is nothing for you to report other than keyboard warrior, repeater of Ron Paul talking points, would be philosopher king without credentials and failed conservative wannabe (depending on an eccentric version of the meaning of "conservative").
As to the fraudulent pose of Ron Paul as "pro-life," it does not matter how many babies he delivered. Dr. Bingham, the Planned Barrenhood abortionist at Norwich, CT, (who is a member of the Party of the Right of the Yale Political Union for that matter) has probably delivered that many and then some. However, he is an atheist and has testified before the Connecticut General Assembly that he believes that there is no such thing as individual life, that a fingernail clipping or hair clipping is the moral equivalent of an entire human being, etc, and that there is only some all inclusive entity (human and otherwise) called "life." In the matter of abortion policy, no one who is genuinely a pro-lifer gives a rat's patoot what paleoPaulie SAYS he believes while gulling the suckers (or Dr. Bingham fr that mater). What matters is what Paulie is willing to DO to stop abortion. The answer so far is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING as he hides behind his quaint barricade of the otherwise long ignored 10th amendment. BTW, the Ninth Amendment (even longer ignored) was the only "constitutional" basis claimed by Herod Blackmun to underlie Roe vs. Wade and the onset of the American Holocaust. Analogous argument applies as the radical left in alliance with the fedcourts and the libertoonians try to establish rumpranging as a "federal right" that no state court dare interfere with (just like Roe vs. Wade as to babykilling). These are the crucial issues whose resolution will make or break Western Civilization, not Paulie's little hobbies. Ron Paul wants to play conscientious objector to effective action on each of them. Opinions are like noses and certain other body parts. Everyone has one. What counts is action. He won't ACT. He whines, moans and groans and the babies continue to be slaughtered without ANY EFFECTIVE ACTION by Ron Paul. He does not try and fail. He does not try and he refuses to try. He is a phony on the most serious issue before our society. Those who are not phonies like him are not amused by his phoniness on such an issue.
Air Force officer? He was an Air Force Ob-Gyn and thus an officer and he would not have known diddly or squat about combat which certainly is obvious from his wall of resistance to actual military action. Stationing the military on the borders to eliminate by superior fire power Mexican mamacitas and their babies trying (in quite diminished numbers nowadays) to cross our southern border is a waste of military power. Paul should be the first to advocate taking the restraints off state governments to enforce the borders of their own states. When an Obozo (or a paleosurrenderman who is not being nominated much less elected in any event) is in office the fedgov will be a less than useless non-player.
Have you ever been nominated for Congress as a Republican? Probably not. If one who has been nominated as a Republican asked Reagan or any Republican POTUS to sign an endorsement letter saying that (the nominee) Hieronymous Q. Pecksniff's election is essential to the wood whittler community and that only Pecksniff can protect the whittler's interests, the letter will be signed and returned promptly on White House stationery. Did I mention that all this chumminess alleged to have existed between the paleosurrendermonkey and Ronaldus Maximus came BEFORE Paulie ran as a Libertoonian for POTUS in 1988 attacking Reagan to please the usual gang of libertoonian, pro-abort, pro-homosexuality, anti-military, anti-American gang of suspects in that party? When Paul is in libertoonian mode, he wears a beanie with a spinning propeller on top and his eyes roll in place. He is a crackpot like his zombies.
I have no need to "rethink my position." My positions have remained those of the conservative movement (the New Right of the '60s and '70s) all these years. Ron Paul needs to re-think his positions but he lacks the capacity to think or re-think and, as you say, he won't anyway.
Other than attracting the support of such anti-Semites as David Duke and Conrad Black and such rank imbeciles as Alex Jones and the 9/11 Troofers, there is the matter of paleoPaulie wanting to sit idly by while his Iranian buddy Ahmanutjob nukes Israel as spring training for nuking the US. Fortunately Paul will never be POTUS and fortunately Bibi Netanyahu can render Teheran and any Iranian nuclear weapon facility flat, black, and glowing in the dark.
You guys should stop libeling George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as though somehow the circumstances of today's United States and the USA of 1789 were somehow comparable. Neither had any problem accepting assistance from Admiral DeGrasse at Yorktown. Thomas Jefferson bought the Louisiana Territory without any search for "constitutional authority" even though such expansions were quite foreseeable at the time. If, like Woods and the surrendermonkey, you don't like the Patriot Act, try the Federalist Alien and Sedition Acts that destroyed the Federalist power once and for all even though the Federalists (Northeastern money obsessives like the Whigs and all too many Republicans after them) had the great advantage of being George Washington's party. They also had the burden of being Alexander Hamilton's party.
If you think Ron Paul has become damaged goods, you ain't seen nothin' yet. Wait until you see his tattered political remains when this cycle is over. His fantasies never were, are not and never will be acceptable to actual conservatives.