Posted on 12/16/2011 7:48:40 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Ask any conservative about Ron Paul and you will usually hear the following statement: "I love him on fiscal policy but his foreign policy is naive and dangerous." You can also throw in the obligatory "He hates Israel." If someone had asked me about Paul from 9/12/01 through October of 2011, I'd have said the exact same things.
Something about my certitude always felt a bit uncomfortable, though, because I admired the "good parts" of Ron Paul (and later, his son Rand). Having participated in the Tea Party movement since its inception, and then witnessing the phony propaganda concocted to invalidate it, my BS meter began to pin whenever I heard (or spoke) harsh rhetoric denouncing Ron Paul. Since the contradiction bugged me, I decided to take the advice of my twenty-year-old son and read Ron Paul's book, Revolution. This required me to consider ideas which were once unthinkable. I undertook the mission with the promise to think outside my conservative box.
After reading the book, I came away with a completely different understanding of Ron Paul and his philosophy. I'm hoping my Tea Party compatriots, fellow conservatives, and all Americans will step outside their own comfort zones to do the same. It is vital that our nation seriously consider the important constitutional concepts and defense of liberty that Ron Paul espouses.
Today, the Middle East is falling to Islamic rule like a series of dominos. The supposed "friendly Arab nations" want our troops out of their land and threaten to side with our enemies. Our soldiers are hamstrung by politically correct rules of engagement that make them sitting ducks. Our economy is collapsing under the weight of our debt (a good portion of which goes to fund our worldwide military adventures),
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“If it came down to it, I’d rather have Ron Paul than Mitt Romney.”
Have to disagree, Romneys self deluded but at least he’s not insane.
Still say Paul has a mental problem.
He’s the scary uncle that comes over for Sunday dinner and leers at the kids. He’s a humorous addition to the otherwise dull boring debates. He gives one or two really good ideas and then blows it on other topics.
Very well said. And it's something that many here choose not to see.
The key here is he is 'talking', but he has shown through his three decades in office he is no more effective as the guy in the corner of a coffee shop rambling about the ills of the world. He has been a failure on the economic front as well. He has authored something like 470 bills and only a couple have even made it to the floor for a vote. The ones that did pass were minor little things like honoring a baseball pitcher in his district.
A lot of people say they like Paul on economics, but look at what he has done when he has a chance. Right now, Paul is in the best seat possible to prove he is more than words. He is the chairman of the banking and monetary policy committee. The Committee that oversees everything he claims to want to fix- even the Fed. He has the authority to put actions behind his words and you know what he has done- Jack and Squat.
No subpoenas, no investigations, no investigators. He had one meeting he ended up canceling- and the witnesses in that meeting, a guy who wrote a book on Southern succession and a blogger.
Phil Gramm put it well a long time ago when he said that Paul could never get a bill passed because they couldn't even get out of committee because they were so poorly written and lacked any detail as to 'how'. Just big pronouncements.
Let's take it one step further. What is the Constitutional role of President? Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. Budget and taxes start in Congress. If Paul is so great on economics but poor on foreign policy, why would you take him out of the role where he is great and put him in the role where is is piss poor?
Very well said. And it's something that many here choose not to see.
Good. You are putting your finger on the core problem with Paul. Paul is practically a ‘Truther’ when he said that Bush was filled with ‘glee’ when 9/11 happenned. He has closely allied himself with some very weird people that believe in worldwide conspiracies by Jewish bankers.
Without a doubt, there have been corrupt and evil bankers that have de-stabilized the financial system. But there is no secret conspiracy that has united George Bush (and other mainline rinos) with George Soros and his allies in an effort to create a one world government that will de-populate the planet by 90%. There is such conspiratorial activity on the Left however. The conspiratorial theory that unites establishment Republicans with radical Leftists does not seem logical when one considers that the MSM only promotes and protects the power of radical Leftists. If the MSM were under the control of this universal and centrally coordinated effort, they would have protected George Bush, and they certainly did not do that.
Someone has to eviscerate the beast of big government. Romney obviously isn’t going to do that.
I don’t like Ron Paul on foreign policy either. But as far as I’m concerned, at this particular juncture in history, the US Federal Government poses a far bigger threat to the safety and security of this country than Iran.
The way the government is supposed to work is that the people are supposed to petition congress to write the legislation and pass the bills.
Obamite’s want the president to usurp the roll of the people. That is the foundation of dictatorship.
Frankly I don't give a crap whether the Iraqis or Afghanis have elections, or schools, or running water, now or ever. And it's not worth one American death to see to it that they do.
Ron Paul is a racist, Nazi-ish, loony tune. I don’t want him, or any of his little friends, anywhere near the presidency. As I stated before, he’s just a cleaner Occupier.
How competent does one have to be to dismantle government?
Obama’s not exactly a genius and had no previous record of accomplishment, yet he’s managed to implement his policies pretty well, even when half the country is opposed.
It takes an engineer to design a machine, but any moron with a wrench can take it apart if he has the will.
The presidency has plenty of power to gut government with or without Congress. We only need someone who actually wants to do it.
Yes, they have. I have a great niece who is foursquare in Ron Paul's corner. I have asked her questions concerning him while hoping to point many of these weaknesses/misunderstandings of our nation's policies. She simply brushes them aside and marches on. I don't wish to alienate her, so I usually just change the subject. Her mother and father disagree with her as well. It's frustrating to me when I encounter an otherwise intelligent person who simply does not respond to logic and reason.
That's it in a nutshell. Right now, the biggest threat to our nation is from within. If we cannot get our economy straightened out, the rest will be a moot--a disaster which will likely last for far longer than 4 years.
Securing the border just might be a good idea as well (how can you have 'National Security' if the nation, itself, isn't secure?
It can't be much worse than an interventionist policy which has delivered the arsenals of North African Dictatorships into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaida.
Sadly, he appears the only one who appears to want anything but more of the same ol' same ol' in DC.
He's a loony.
Ron Paul the guy who is a 9-11 truther....He is good on fiscal stuff but is so far left of Kucinich on foreign policy there is NO WAY I could vote for him (except if he is running against Barry)
Unless Paul completely quacks out and ignores the Constitution (like he does with foreign policy issues), he would have to be very competent as the President doesn't have dictatorial powers. He will have to show leadership abilities to get Congress, who writes these laws, to go along with it.
Obama’s not exactly a genius and had no previous record of accomplishment, yet he’s managed to implement his policies pretty well, even when half the country is opposed.
If you want a leader who works like Obama has, then by all means, vote Paul.
It takes an engineer to design a machine, but any moron with a wrench can take it apart if he has the will.
There is a difference between dismantling and destroying. For example, it actually takes a highly competent engineer to dismantle a building without destroying its foundation and the buildings around it. You don't just get some dumb redneck to stick some dynamite in the bottom and hope it goes boom correctly.
The presidency has plenty of power to gut government with or without Congress.
Not if you follow the Constitution.
We only need someone who actually wants to do it.
Go back to my Fed example. I actually don't believe Paul wants to do it. He has been all talk, but when he is given a role where he can actually do something about the Fed, he hasn't done anything. He has the most power now he will ever have in regards to the Fed and he has been a failure. Like most old career politicians, he has an issue he likes to talk about and raise money on, but actually doesn't fix it lest he no longer can continue to raise money off it or get attention from it.
His history has shown he is nothing more than words, words, words.
If you are hiring an employee, you don't look to someone who just says "I talked about XYZ or I believe in ABC", you want someone with a demonstrable track record of success. Anyone can talk, few can do.
LOL. Well, yeah. He is on the far side of loony.
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.