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.
Freneau: 97 was posted to you. All others were pinged as informational to them.
That was actually going to be my next area of inquiry regarding Ron Paul and his understanding of isolationism and "foreign entanglements."
Personally, I think all this talk of Ron Paul being a strict constructionist in the mold of the founding fathers is nothing but BS.
This is quite a beligerent rant, on par with your last beligerent rant. Where do I begin? How about the first sentence?
>>>You are not interested in my resume <<<
Nope. Your words are all that concerns me. Although, if you assisted in getting George W. Bush the nomination, or Rick Perry into the Governor’s mansion, or Kay Bailey Hutchingson or Phil Gramm into the senate, then I would advise you not to brag.
>>>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.<<<
First, I have seen no indication you are a traditional conservative. You might be one of those “New” conservatives, in line with Kay Bailey, G.W., Phil Gramm or, say, David Brooks, but you are no traditional conservative.
Second, it is either I support, as you call him, the “Galveston sewer rat” (how clever of you!), or support the Pretty Boy Slickster from Texas or the Pretty Boy Slickster from Mass., neither of whom will do a damn thing different from Obama or G.W. (well, maybe a tiny bit different, but not much).
>>>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.<<<
No, I am not a know-it-all political hack, like you. I am a degreed engineer and a retired software designer. But you are welcome to read the nearly 5000 posts from me on Free Republic over the past 11 years to get a sense of where I come from, and how I got here. Read them all, then get back to me about my “credentials”.
[After a long, incoherent rant about how Ron Paul cannot be pro-life because the Planned Parenthood abortionist also delivered babies, or something—as I said, it was incoherent—you wrote:]
>>>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.<<<
I agree. He should just march right down to the White House, declare himself dictator, and ban abortion on the spot. [/s]
Man, you are nuts!
It sounds like you are not too thrilled by the 10th Amendment (I mean, after all, you are not a conservative), but it really does apply in the case of abortion, and in the cases of most everything else not specifically authorized to the general government.
>>>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.<<<
As I suspected, a “New” conservative. [I’m certain you have heard this one:] What’s the difference between a “New Conservative and a Liberal. The “New Conservative” drives the bus over the cliff slower than the Liberal.
>>>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<<<
Is that called, “slander by inference”? I’ll bet George W. Bush attracted some pretty shady supporters, as well. They don’t have a lot of choices, you know.
Regarding anti-semitism, I am Jewish, and I don’t think Ron Paul has an anti-semitic bone in his body.
I am also NOT a 9/11 truther. As an engineer, I believe I know how the towers fell. The jet fuel created a sufficiently high temp to weaken the steel cross beams—the beams which held the perimeter beams as a square. They eventually failed, resulting in an outward bulge in the perimeter beams and ultimate failure of that floor. The floors above pancaked onto that floor, resulting in total collapse. It is really pretty simple. It also helps that I saw many, many videos from private citizens of the planes hitting the towers (that eliminated the conspiracy angle).
The 2nd tower fell first because the plane hit much lower in the tower, with the wings at an angle. The extra weight above, and the multi-floor damage to the cross beams cause by the plane entry angle, resulted in quick failure. BTW, when the cross beams failed, it would have sounded like a bomb blast, at least that is what I have surmised from all the research.
But I digress...
>>>. . .fortunately Bibi Netanyahu can render Teheran and any Iranian nuclear weapon facility flat, black, and glowing in the dark.<<<
You think just like Ron Paul. He is on record many times saying that Israel has [hundreds] of nukes, and can defend itself, and they don’t need our help (well, maybe it would help if we stayed the hell out of their way. But he didn’t say that. I did).
>>>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.<<<
We never pretended circumstances today are similar to 1789. In those days they had limited, constitutional government. Today we have a tyranny. BTW, I recommend you look up the definition of the word “libel”.
>>>Neither had any problem accepting assistance from Admiral DeGrasse at Yorktown.<<<
War is hell. But we were not a nation at that time. We were revolutionary rebels, struggling against the largest army on earth. We took all the help we could get. I’m not sure what your point is.
>>>Thomas Jefferson bought the Louisiana Territory without any search for “constitutional authority” even though such expansions were quite foreseeable at the time.<<<
Actually, he submitted a proposal to congress for a constitutional amendment after the fact. He definitely knew he usurped the constitution, but he did not want the “deal of the century” to get away. Today these clowns don’t even consider the constitution, or long rang consequences, before usurpation. Consider G.W. and his Medicare Prescription Drug act, or, “No Child Left Behind”.
>>>If, like Woods and the surrendermonkey, you don’t like the Patriot Act, try the Federalist Alien and Sedition Acts 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.<<<
Are you implying it is okay to have the Patriot Act, just because the Federalists under Adams had the Alien and Sedition Acts? No, thanks to either.
>>>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.<<<
I believe you meant to say, “new-fangled conservatives”. You are definitely no conservative.