Ron Paul attempting to hijack Republican convention November 27, 2007
I’ve held off and held off and held off on this post, but it’s time to set the record straight about Ron Paul.
First, let me say this, and there are a few avid readers of this blog who I respect, but simply don’t support who they support. So, because of them, I have really held off writing anything negative about Texas Congressman Ron Paul because, well, he and his candidacy are irrelevant.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I love people being involved in the political process. And, everyone out there has a right to their own opinions about who they support for President.
And, there is no doubt, the small amount of people who support Ron Paul are fervent in their beliefs.
At the beginning of the convention process, I said an outsider candidate with little support, but with a strong grassrooots organization, could come in and make a statement because of the wide open set-up of our new party primary convention.
Let’s be honest here.
Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.
When I saw the Gazette weep with excitement about the amount of money Ron Paul raised last quarter, I said, uh-oh.
You could see it coming.
So, the Ron Paul people have been coming out in droves and signing up to be At-large Delegates to the State Convention. In fact, at this point, I believe they are ahead in the ‘at large’ category of Delegates. Of course, in counties where there are contested elections, they will lose.
And, the problem with this, and the problem with me writing about it, is it only draws more attention to the Paul candidacy, exactly what they want.
First, let me debunk a few myths.
That Ron Paul’s fundraising is unbelievable. Please. Lyndon LaRouche would haul in millions as well and his candidacy probably had a better chance of winning than Paul, meaning 0.001%.
Secondly, Paul’s stance on an immediate surrender in Iraq simply won’t sell in a Republican primary.
But, he is a media darling and he is a media darling for two reasons. He is different. And, trust me, the media loves ‘different.’ It gives them something to write about.
But, more importantly, Ron Paul lines up with the liberal media and the Democrats on surrender in Iraq. And, the fact that a Republican candidate actually espouses something the rest of the party opposes is, well… different.
So, that means that despite only garnering 2% of the polls, Paul gets attention.
And, needless to say, he will get attention here because his near fanatical following is willing to drop $25 in an open convention process to get their names on the ballot. So, while his supporters who have signed up have little chance of winning their local county elections, they are again able to generate press because they are signing up people.
I have nothing against the people who support Ron Paul. They have every right to do so. But, the excitement and the reason they are even on the map is because they line up with the liberal media on the issue of Iraq. Thus being different generates press, Ron Paul generates press, heck even I couldn’t help but comment on his candidacy.
But, he won’t win the primary.
In fact, he won’t win a state.
Actually, he won’t garner more than 10% ever in any poll that is ever run and actually will most likely remain right where he belongs… among the 2% of contrarian Republicans who are against Bush and Iraq.
They will attempt to hijack the convention, but they will not succeed. Most Republicans realize this is a serious process for serious candidates. And, whichever of those candidates win, the one thing I can assure you of is that it won’t be Ron Paul.
-->
Loading...
378 Responses to “Ron Paul attempting to hijack Republican convention”
Who would we be surrendering to? Are we at war with Iraq? Are we at war with any nation? Hmmm…
Well, now you can say goodbye to YOUR political career, Senator Sprouse. You know all those people you will need to re-elect you? They will be Ron Paul supporters. Guess who they are NOT going to vote for now?
It truly is a foolish move to underestimate Ron Paul’s support. I suspect they are planning a replacement for you as I write this.
Bye Bye and thanks for indebting my children with the deferred payment plan view on spending.
You’re exactly right. Although I have encountered a few semi-sane Paul supporters out there, most of his supporters are paranoid, delusional, and totally out of touch with reality. As for Rep. Paul, he is hopelessly naieve about the world in which we live (yes, the Islamofascist terrorists are out to get us and will not stop until they kill or at least subjugate us) and totally out of touch with the reality of what can be achieved on the domestic front.
The next thing we have to worry about is a lot of these people filing to run for legislative and local offices and becoming potential embarassments for the party where they run in unwinnable races and wind up saying and doing incredibly outlandish things for which we as a party have to apologize.
Unlike Virginia, West Virginia does not allow its political parties to declare that they will not field a candidate for office. If someone wants to run for an office where we have no chance, he or she has the righ tot do so if he or she is legally eligible to run and pays the filing fee. We need a similar law in West Virginia.
I am a conservative and a realist. I also know that if we compromise too far in the quest to stop Hillary, we will wind up with a third party spoiler candidate who will appeal to a small but crucial percentage of the electorate who insists on casting a “pure” vote of conscience and alllow Hillary to win with a plurality when she would never win a 2-way race. That’s why I’m supporting Fred Thompson.
“If to please the people we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how then shall we stand? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the rest is in the hands of God.” ~George Washington
Jim et all,
I read your comment here, and I was relatively horrified by your unfortunate experience in not running across individuals who can defend the principles of Congressman Ron Paul. I sat at a table with you with other presidents of the student chapters of the Federalist Society, and I do not recall you being particularly forward in any defense of Former Senator Thompson or any of the other “conservatives” running for the White House. I suppose you would lump me in with the ” few semi-sane Paul supporters out there” you have run across. How touching. I wish you had the courage to tell me that directly at our meeting rather than use internet anonymity to attempt to discredit principled supporters of a principled conservative. Your use of the term ” Islamofascist terrorists ” is mind-boggling. Are you even aware of what the definition of fascism is? It is far closer to the interventionist welfare-regime created by FDR, strengthened by LBJ, and expanded by GWB, than it is to the world-wet-dream of Osama bin Laden in a cave in Pakistan.
You wrote ” The next thing we have to worry about is a lot of these people filing to run for legislative and local offices and becoming potential embarassments for the party where they run in unwinnable races and wind up saying and doing incredibly outlandish things for which we as a party have to apologize.” Well, now you’ve personally launched insults at me, classy sir, classy. Ah, forgive me, I had not noticed I am not a lifelong Republican with conservative credentials far in excess of your own… how dare I contemplate civic action to advance the principles of individual liberty, the rule of law, government limited to the defense of life, liberty and property, and the strict enforcement of the text of the U.S. Constitution… how ashamed and abashed I must make you feel to open my heretical mouth. Apparently you are unfamiliar, or are disagreement with John Quincy Adams when he wrote “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” Apparently also in opposition to Henry Clay in his quip, “I’d rather be right than President.” I understand, you are not concerned with principles, but with power. It is a Machiavellian pursuit, to prevent one’s opponent from gaining the coveted reigns of the state-apparatus…charming thought. Perhaps you would listen to the words of Thomas Jefferson, “In questions of powers, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Why not support a strict constructionist for election to the White House? Why only advocate the appointment of strict constructionists to the courts when we need them in all branches? Do you even realize that you, with your current position and delegation of political support, would oppose Justice Scalia if he were running for office? If not, think on it. Would you support Clarence Thomas if he ran for political office? I mean, he does want to completely revolutionize constitutional jurisprudence… how wacky is that?
I happen to be a life-long conservative, from a proud family of Reagan supporters, son of two activist pro-life physicians. I am a graduate of Hillsdale College, a second year law student, the president of my chapter of the Federalist Society, the precinct co-chair and several-time state delegate for the Republican Party of Rochester, MN, and am a Blackstone Legal Fellow of the Alliance Defense Fund. I support Congressman Paul and his principles wholeheartedly.
Congressman Paul believes not in isolationism as has been repeatedly asserted, but in non-interventionism. A non-interventionist policy position is not based on sticking our government’s head in the sand as it were, separating ourselves from the world, but on the principle of non-encroachment in the affairs of other sovereigns, so long as they do not violate our sovereignty and the lives, liberties and property of our citizens. Iran’s interest, as is the interest of all nations, is in self-preservation. Actions have consequences, ideas have consequences: stationing foreign troops among a population opposed to their presence is an invitation for attack. I seem to recall a time when American colonialists revolted against the unwanted presence of foreign troops among our people… a revolt considered justly by us a liberating war for independence against tyranny.
Liberty is a good thing is that it means leaving people to live out their own lives in their own way, while we do the same. Congressman Paul extends this principle beyond his fellow American citizens, and believes that other peoples around the world, so long as they restrain from attacking us, should be left inviolate. If Americans truly believe in liberty, as part of our fundamental American principles, why shall we not stand by their champion? Why are we going to throw liberty away to enter upon an interventionist policy of foreign dominion and domestic regulation?
The republic the founders of this country formed was a dream in reality which demands and commands far more than a mere solitary word of respect and affection from a candidate for office before it passes away.The founders were not concerned with “national greatness;” they were concerned with the preservation of liberty. In America, there was never intended to be a grand over-arching interventionist diplomacy, because in the United States, Americans intended to mind their own business and not be involved with the intrigues and inevitable “blowback”–negative foreign reaction to intervention, of which foreign “statesmen” normally encountered.
Under the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution, there was to be no balance of power for which to sacrifice the lives, happiness and property of citizens. Government was to be limited, for our founders knew that foreign dominion would spawn leviathan at home. Government was to be economical, even should foreign statesmen peer across the waters and sneer at our “parsimonious” status. Taxation and regulation, in the absence of the regulations and controls made necessary by the warfare state, would be minimal, and only so great as necessary to secure and pay for the defense of liberty.
The citizen of the United States was to be a free man, a man who did not face the intrusive force of government in his daily life. It was to be a government whose primary connection to the citizen would be the delivery of the mails. Madison, Jefferson, Randolph, Taylor, Martin, Lee, Jackson, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Thomas Hart Benton, and a host of others agreed, that this country, this republic, was not to embark on “adventurous” policies of conquest, liberation, or ambition. The citizen should and would never be conscripted or enrolled to leave his family, friends, and property, to sacrifice his sons and his blood, leaving a wake of widows and paupers, to achieve “greatness.”
These are the principles our fathers fought for against England, these are the principles they left enshrined in the supreme law of the land, the U.S. Constitution, these are the principles and ideals by which the authors claim Ron Paul advocates that we be “isolated.”
If this be “isolation,” then we are “isolated” in a manner in which all the peoples of the nations of the world have viewed us with silent envy for a hundred years of our history. As did Thomas Jefferson maintained when he wrote, “I deem one of the essential principles of our government to be peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none…Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto.”
Congressman Paul maintains this position, the position of the founders, rooted firmly on the principles of the founding. These positions are not unrealistic, nor dangerous. They represent a return to what America stands for. Individual liberty, reason, the free and open discussion of ideas, which will be drawn through the pursuit of free intellects, toward that natural gravitational pull of that center of all knowledge: Truth. Jefferson wrote, “Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind.” We must not fall to such suggestions, despite the doubtlessly good intentions proponents of this position espouse.
Under a Paul administration, it is true that the United States may not be so great a “super-power,” but what of that? Why should this status be more primary to our concern than the preservation of liberty in our own land? The best manner in which to secure our good name among the nations of the earth is to maintain peaceful policies with all peoples, maintain free trade with them, and protect and maintain on our shores, those liberties which have, for two hundred twenty years, made our republic the exemplar of free peoples the world over.
Your fellow federalist,
Benjamin S. Kuipers
President Emeritus, Case Western Reserve Fed. Soc.
That the republican party in West Virginia is vulnerable to these attacks says much more about the party than it does about Ron Paul.
Dr Paul should have stayed with the Libertarian Party. He is more aligned with their philosophy than with ours.
Don’t get me wrong, I would very much like to see our party embrace some of the Libertarian doctrine; smaller government, less taxes, less government spending, less governmental interference with our personal lives, etc. Then they have taken weird positions such as legalizing drugs. I personally don’t mind a person exercising the freedom to ruin their health (assuming that they’re an adult), but I resent them wanting me to subsidize their habit. They have a well deserved reputation as a party of kooks.
The nail of truth has once again been hit squarely on the head. Thank you, Senator.
Ron Paul’s WV contingency has been hammering me via mail and phone calls for a couple weeks now. It’s driving me nuts.
I wil say this, no other candidate has tried so hard to get my attention.
Its sad that the only constitutional patriot is being attacked by Republicans who at one time was constitutional.
Ask yourself, why is the Republican party in the minority now? You will see they will be in more minority numbers in the next years to come unless that listen to the message like that of Ron Paul.
The nations of the middle east were created by Great Britain prior to WWI. There was no such thing as Jordan, or Iraq or Iran until Britain did this. After the Western nations made nations in the middle east, we started to go for power grabs. Then we reaarranged borders under Churchill. The people in the middle east got screwed several times by the west. They have reasons to be upset.
OF course I’ll get the arrogant accusations becasue the repuclicans are no longer readers of history but of Rush.
The people of the middle east are “people” created by God. I hate their religion but they are still people screwed by the west. And then we went in and took their oil.
So since WWI we have had to deal with this problem of Nation Building.
By bringing down Saddam, whom we support then killed only adds to their hatred.
But go ahead a spew the garbage that is causing the repuclicans to lose more seats.
Or listen to a constitutional, america politician for once in your life.
May God forgive us of our errors, Hatred and Ignorance.
You’re right, it’s a lost cause. I have no doubt the powers that be in Washington DC won’t stop until we become the Zimbabwe of the Americas.
Ron Paul has a real chance against the war pigs. I am a staunch Republican, and Dr. Paul’s message is the closest I have heard to sane.
“Let’s be honest here”
Does that mean everything you said before that wasn’t honest?
LOL
Wow,
You have a right to your opinion, but you should try and get your facts straight:
“So, that means that despite only garnering 2% of the polls, Paul gets attention.”
What polls are you looking at? The old ones taken back when the media was attempting to censor Ron Paul? (Because far from a “media darling” the media is afraid to cover him, and when they do they try and do it in a way that makes him seem illegitimate, similar to the way you wrote your article).
Rasmussen and others have Ron Paul close to double digits, 8%, in the current polls.
Get real and be honest with your readers about your anti-Ron Paul bias.
Methinks the Senator doth protest too much. But you did manage to fit all of the neocon buzzwords–’surrender’, ‘liberal’, and ‘irrelevant’–into the post quite nicely.
The Ron Paul juggernaut is coming and the establishment is getting scared. Really scared.
Ron Paul hijack the Republican Party? I’m sorry Senator, but it is the current makeup of the party, filled with fake republicans who have hijacked the entire party. What ever happened to fiscal conservatism, small government, low taxes, and the idea that we are not in the nation building business. The republican party changed not the supporters of the party. We have maintained and have been left behind which is the reason for the current decline of the republican party. Ron Paul may not have the answer on all the issues but I assure you the reason he has such a strong following is because he is more Republican than you and the rest of the thieves of OUR party. We are not loyal to a party who changes the foundation of their beliefs, it is you who should have been loyal to our beliefs.
Senator,
Perhaps you should stop being a hypocrite, and enlist for military service to fight this brave war for empire your so in favor of. Your ignorance of Ron Paul’s positions is exactly what I’d expect from an ass kissing, establishment chicken hawk such as yourself. Why is it that those most in support of offering up soldiers lives for nation building would never even think of serving or sending their children to serve. You discust me, you pathetic piece of human debris.
As a conservative Republican, I count all candidates except Ron Paul as liberal fear-mongers who happen to be registered as Republicans. The neocon policies are more typical of Democrats but while the conservatives were not paying attention, liberals have hijacked our Republican Party. No more. We’re here to stay and we will continue to rescue the GOP as a vehicle for promoting CONSERVATIVE values in government.
The 2008 GOP primary is important but if Ron Paul does not win, all his support will go away in November. None of the other GOP candidates have any ‘cross-over’ appeal for conservatives, libertarians, and independents. Without Paul, the GOP will suffer an embarrassing defeat in November. With Paul, the GOP will win in a landslide.
I love articles like this one that are written by people who don’t have a clue who Ron Paul’s supporters are. The Poison Fans who the media concentrates on are not Paul’s core supporters. The real support from Dr. Paul is coming from people you’ll never hear of; people who participate in local county politics and who will continue to participate after the 2008 nomination and the November election even though we will not cast a vote for any Republican except Ron Paul. We will continue to take back our party until EVERY candidate represents conservative values. We have a long ways to go since the GOP is run by liberals now. Having two liberal parties is not good for the USA. It is time to give the Neocons the boot and save the GOP.
Jahfre Fire Eater
you say ron paul wants to “surrender” in iraq. can you really surrender after you’ve been beaten? the u.s. has lost the “war” in iraq and now it’s only a matter of time before we are bankrupted there.
russ -
“I personally don’t mind a person exercising the freedom to ruin their health (assuming that they’re an adult), but I resent them wanting me to subsidize their habit.”
no libertarian would ever advocate that anyone be subsidized like this, or any other way for that matter.
“He is more aligned with their philosophy than with ours.”
republicans have no philosophy. they are whatever is popular at the time and the identity can be changed based on popular opinion, like the current leftists who hijacked the party under the auspices of neoconservatism.
Whats so different about Ron Paul hijacking the party as a Libertarian and Rudy’s camp trying to do the same as moderates?
Nothing, neither follow the platform.
I 100% agree with Aaron. The republicans who can’t see Dr. Paul’s vision need to wake up! This man is the only candidate republican or democrat who is speaking the truth to the American people and trying to set this country on a better path. The reason why Ron Paul supporters are trying so hard to get peoples attention is that they’re awake to the truth and know that this country is in for some dark times if things aren’t changed right now. Listen to Dr. Paul and go to his website. Read for yourselves. Wake Up and vote to put this country on a better path. Dr. Paul is the only candidate willing to do that.
so senator sprouse thinks it is alright to send our children over to iraq to be killed and maimed while he sits safe at home just so iraq won’t implode. hate to break the news but iraq is already imploding. keep up with the news, senator
How very typical of “conservative” “Republican” politicians…whose knowledge of history is on par with their understanding of the philosophy of freedom.
Lackey sycophants like this Senator for West Virginia! for Government, Government meddling(”better” govt education/more “efficient” Ministry of Internal Security er DHS/”more” equitiable distribution”SEIZURE” of others wealth to build better govt buildings and pay for OTHER GOVERNMENTS socialism ie Clinton-like NATION BUILDING!!!!” are indistiguishable to the alleged “opposite” Democrats…and certain 20th Century European political entities….
Ron Paul and his growing supporters dont care per se about politics in and of itself..it is the MESSAGE of freedom and LIMITING GOVERNMENT CONTROLS of all of our lives that drives us to spread the message of freedom…
Unlike the MEGALOMANIA and arrogant elitism of that drives the ruling elite…. and CONDITIONED demands of the Pavlovian masses clamoring for more bread and more circuses….and Republicans demanding more get tough! laws and more soldiers and unending printing of more and more Federal Reserve Notes ie INFLATION
I have been a over 2 decades political activist leader in California…watching the Republican and Conservative movements collapse in a sundry mess of hypocracy, “me too!” socialism, and irrelevance…
Mr. Senator and citizens of WV and readers, wake up to what is happening to our country…
Ron Paul irrelevant? Ron Paul a media darling? What planet have you been living on? The mainstream media has covered Ron Paul mainly with hit pieces and transparent attempts to marginalize him. The mud they’re slinging isn’t sticking too well because Dr. Paul is the single most knowledgeable, straight-talking, and honorable presidential candidate by a wide margin, and this has the established plutocracy very worried.
Never mind the military industrial complex. The single biggest industry as a group in the United States right now is the financial industry. More money is made merely moving money around than at any other industry in the United States, and they are killing our economy in the process. Dr. Ron Paul is a direct and growing threat to that industry. This is why the establishment will do everything it can do make sure Ron Paul never becomes president.
I voted for George W. Bush both in 2000 and in 2004 and when I heard that we had a traitor in our party running for President who wants to call it quits in Iraq I was outraged.
As time wore on, though, and now that the economy has faltered under the embarrassing national debt doubling spending of the past 7 years, I started to listen to little snippets of Ron Paul. The more I listened, the more I realized that he was truly conservative. His principles are legally strict and his faith to the Constitution is unmatched. The war in Iraq required a declaration of war from the Congress. Without the declaration, the war could be manipulated into just an action of the presidency versus an action of the Congress.
At first I hated Ron Paul, but now I can’t find a single issue to disagree with him on.
“Actually, he won’t garner more than 10% ever in any poll that is ever run..”
I hope you enjoy the taste of your hat, Senator. You’ll be eating it. The Neocons’ days are numbered.
If Ron Paul is irrelevant, then why did you see fit to attack him.
Though Dr. Paul is bringing together people from all backgrounds, this is not a phenomenon of liberals, and libertarians attempting to hijack the republican party as many conspiracy theorist suggest.
His support comes from people who long for freedom from a government that has grown, and continues to grow out of control, with complete disregard to the constitution and the basic rights of individuals.
I supported Bush in 2000, and considered the war in Iraq to be necessary. After careful consideration and research over the years — mainly thanks to Ron Paul and his vast knowledge of foreign affairs — I have come to acknowledge the error in my thinking.
the term libertarian, to me, seems to be the replacement for conservative, since neo-conservatives and republicans have drifted dangerously close to the big-government, big-spending, interventionist, progressive liberal democrats.
I am extremely grateful that we have an honest man of unmatched integrity challenging the status quo, and attempting to return this country to the Constitutional Republic it once was.
Why don’t you join the army and request to be sent to Iraq since it seems you so want the US to be engaged there…
If “serious” candidates are those that spout big government “conservatism” and mock the Rule of Law as “loony” I’ll stick by the fringe candidates all day long.
Senator,
I have a hard time understanding what you possibly have to gain by making these bold predications. If you’re right, Ron Paul and his supporters will fade away on their own. If you’re wrong, you have potentially put an embarassing mark on your political career.
Good luck in your career. Frankly, my own bold predication (safe because I would never consider lowering myself to a career in politics) is that you will never achieve anything more prestigious than being a state senator.
Russ writes: “Then [Libertarians] have taken weird positions such as legalizing drugs. I personally don’t mind a person exercising the freedom to ruin their health (assuming that they’re an adult), but I resent them wanting me to subsidize their habit.”
Russ, I’m a Libertarian. The strongest drug I regularly consume is caffeine (occasionally I down an Advil with my Diet Coke), and my Libertarian husband gives me hell about that (no, we’re not Mormons:) . But I do appreciate your broad-mindedness in ‘[not minding] a person exercising their freedom’. What confuses me is your comment about ’subsidizing their habit’. The *last* thing any Libertarian would expect/desire/demand is for other people to be forced to subsidize *anything*. If you’ve gotten that impression, I am happy to correct it. What Libertarians want is an end to the government subsidy of the *drug trade* that the so-called War on Drugs (WoD) creates. By increasing the risk premium for shipping/selling drugs, the WoD drives up prices and draws some pretty shady characters into the drug trade. I’d like to see much less of both _your_ money and _my_ money going to harass/protect (depending on your viewpoint) adults who neither need nor want our harassment/protection from the consequences of their own choices. The War on Drugs makes *everyone* - except for the top-level drug distributors - less well off. And I *do want to end the subsidy to those folks! I hope we can agree on that sentiment
The Republican Party’s ideological roots included Jacobinism from the very beginning. Read this speech by Charles Sumner in 1867.
Your worries about Iraq “imploding” if we leave are strange. We have already practically destroyed the country, with perhaps hundreds of thousands dead, millions fleeing, the infrastructure devastated. Did you notice the recent poll where 58% of the Iraqi people said they supported killing American soldiers? THEY DON’T WANT US THERE.
I’m sitting here wondering why I should care what a schmuck from West Virginia, whom I’ve never heard of, thinks about Ron Paul. Alas, I got the link from someone whose ideas I do care about.
But go on, don’t let me interrupt your drooling and poking forks in your eyes …
I agree. These Paulians are trying to hijack the convention. Reminds me of the 1860 election when a little known Congressman from Illinois hijacked the convention. You should read up on some of the tricks his supporters used. It was crazy.
So Senator, how much exactly do we need to spend to not “surrender” in Iraq? Would 3 trillion be high enough for you? Does it bother you that younger people like myself will have to pay for this?
I don’t think throwing money at some middle-eastern shit-hole is an effective or productive way to fight terrorism. Leaving is not surrendering. Staying is surrendering - to the will of al Qaeda who seeks to have us spend our all on this fruitless, immensely counterproductive war.
I’m a registered Republican and have been for over 30 years. I’m a little confused by all this talk of surrender.
Surrender? Ron Paul advocates surrender of Anerica? Surrender to whom? Who or what is dictating and going to accept the terms of surrender? Is the surrender unconditional?
I haven’t read anything about Ron Paul’s call for America’s surrender. I have read that he advocates withdrawing American troops currently unconstitutionally deployed and embattled in the Middle East.
Maybe I was brought up differently from the rest of the GOP, but . . .
If my son trespasses upon my neighbor’s land and punches my neighbor’s son in the nose without legitimate reason or provocation, I’d immediately call my son home, make him apologize, and make him pay reparations for his behavior. And I wouldn’t call his “withdrawal” from the fight a “surrender”. I’d call it civilized accountability. Makes for a better humanity, good and safer neighborhoods and other good things like that.
I also read that Ron Paul advocates withdrawing American troops from a bazillion other places around the world, most of which are doing nothing but spending American taxpayer’s bucks and subsidizing undemocratic, foreign regimes. I wouldn’t call that act “surrender”, either.
So what’s all this stuff about surrender?
Have a nice day.
“Surrender” in Iraq?
How can the US military “surrender” a place it has no right being?
How can the United States “surrender” territory that doesn’t belong to it?
If we “surrender,” wil our troops lay down their arms and turn themselves over to enemy troops or insurgents?
No. We will give the government of Iraq a firm date certain by which we will begin withdrawal, and by which they had better step up and defend their own liberties.
The enlistment oath I took didn’t include anything about destroying third-world hell-holes to liberate their opppressed, then staying on for the next fifty years to “nation build.”
Bush declared “Mission Accomplished” in 2003. Our troops have done what they were sent there to do: topple Saddam and bring him to justice, and let Iraqis form a new government in which the people could have a say. If we “march them right out” the way we “marched them right in,” as Dr. Paul has said, we won’t be “surrendering” anything. We will be restating Bush’s declaration of vitory, and handing Iraq over to the Iraqis.
Ben Franklin’s statement, “A republic, if you can keep it,” should apply equally to Iraq and her people is it did to America and hers.
Frank in Phoenix
An anti-THIS-war evangelical conservative
“Cursed are the proud,
for they shall inherit the quagmire.
Cursed are the warmongers, for they shall be
called sons of b—-es.”
A “defense strategy” that depends on borrowing $1 trillion from China and another half trillion from Saudi Arabia and Russia is a good idea. The obvious flaws of this strategy are compounded when the government depends on knowingly lies to lead the American people into this risky situation. The flaws are compounded further when the government tells us that we must defend “freedom” by destroying the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendment of our constitution!
You twiddle your thumbs preaching hate-filled speaches about “Islamo Facism” as our currency crisis gets worse and worse! Have you ever studied the origins of the Federal Reserve?…the history of monetary policy in this world?
If you support this insane “defense strategy” then you are a enemy to the safety and security of my family. You need to read some history and study what our government is doing to us.
All I want to know is if the acceptable Republican answer to the war is not “surrendering” or in fact victory, please tell me what victory is going to look like? The Republicans (neocons) don’t have an answer other than perpetual occupation and that is *not* victory. Is that what it takes to be a “strong” president? To throw money at the military to carry on with violence indefinitely? (after having spent their youth doing everything in their power, or daddies power, to keep them away from the barracks) Yes of course we’re going to kick tail, we’ve got money and we’ve got guns. What we’re lacking is a moral foundation and the money is running out as well. We’ve become accustomed as Americans to think that we have unlimited resources and power and that we can do anything we put our minds to. Well all the time we’ve been doing it we’ve been doing it on borrowed resources and borrowed (stolen) lives. You want to go to war, you want to stay in war, pick up a God damned rifle and pack, raise your own God damned money and go to God damned war! This is a crusade into insanity, not a defensive war of any kind. How can anybody be so simple minded as to listen to Bush Co’s lies and then still believe them after they’ve been disproved? This is a perpetuation of the military industrial complex, the Fat Cats who benefit and an empire whose foundation is crumbling beneath our feet. Why is the credit crunching? Why is the Dollar falling? How far is the bottom? Look out below people. Oh and when the bottom does fall out where will be those who perpetuated and benefited from this war? They won’t be gnashing their teeth in poverty I can tell you that right now. By the way “hijacking” is the establishment’s word for revolution. You want to hear the truth about war? Read up on double Medal of Honor recipient Major General Smedley Butler’s writings and speeches after he retired. More specifically “War is a Racket”. The concept of that thesis is epitomized by this war.
Josh M
USMC
For a minute, forget about whether this war is morally right or wrong; it’s wrong, but let’s forget about that. What is it costing us versus what we are getting out of it? If you take your emotions out it, and if you let go of the need to save face, and if you let go of the juvenile need to appear triumphant, then the cold truth left to you is that this war is a loser. Let it go. Stop the hemorrhaging of lives and money. I’ve been fortunate in that none of my family members have been injured or killed over there - so far. However, the share of the bill to my household to pay for this war is over $20,000 and rising. I’ve already given (been robbed, actually) more than enough to something I’ve never believed in - all because the assholes in Washington decided that some foreign assholes weren’t obedient enough.
Enough is enough. Ron Paul is right.
Well, Paul is actually drawing 6% in national polls, and polling higher in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. So your piece is extremely poorly researched right off the bat - unless your characterization of Paul’s support being 2% is a deliberate lie, a possibility I suppose I should not immediately discount.
John Kerry was polling lower than that at this point in the 2004 cycle, and he ended up securing the nomination.
Also, national polls show that 28-35% of Republicans favor an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. The number is, of course, much higher among independents, who can cross over and vote in many Republican primaries. In a divided field these numbers make it possible for Paul to win the nomination running on an antiwar platform. You may not like that, but it’s true.
In any event, your post here is internally contradictory to the point of ludicrousness anyway: You assert on the one hand that Paul has not support, but then turn around and worry that Paul’s supporters may “take over” the convention. If he has no support, how can he take over the convention? If he has limited support, but those supporters actually make an effort to participate in the convention process and the supporters of other candidates don’t, whose fault is that?
And to Russ Snyder - if you don’t want to subsidize people who take drugs, the simple solution is to just not subsidize them. What sort of crack-brained “kooky” ratiocination do you have to go through to decide that it’s more efficient to criminalize them, and spend tens of thousands of dollars per year to incarcerate each person you arrest? Just don’t subsidize health care. Problem solved.
Hmm - so the only issue that defines “Republican” is support for the war in Iraq? We’ve already won in Iraq - no WMD, no Saddam, an elected govt - what are we trying to achieve now? To leave is not surrender - its good policy - good Republican policy. To support any of the establishment candidates - democrat or republican is to support continued American interference abroad. Is that what we want? Or should we come home, get our fiscal house in order and revive the Republic as Dr Paul and the founders would have us do.
Senator - the philosophy of liberty espoused by Dr Paul will sweep this nation - I suggest you get aboard if you want to keep your seat.
Cheers
OF course the American people would like another Few Trillion Dollars worth of DEBT We love Serving China!!!! China can just own us forever and the Fed can do whatever it wants.
Let’s all bend over and take it like real Americans!
Todd,
Thank you, I was coming back to say the same thing.
Why is it when its “your” guy is winning, you say the people are behind him”?
But “your” guy struggles you call it “they’re attacked by the media or they don’t see the truth”?
What i hear in this blog is pouting, like a little child saying “I want my toy”!!!
One of the funniest things I’ve read in a long time. Yes, you are very serious. Seriously whistling in the dark. Do I sense terror in your words? You must be very afraid of Ron Paul and his merry band of terrorists. Shame on them! Oh man, my sides are aching!
Dear State Senator from West Virginia, your heretofore discretion is commendable. Thanks for holding off on saying anything about Ron Paul until you could no longer pretend his campaign is not relevent.
I’m curious about which polls you see Ron Paul as being at 2%.
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/candidates/Ron-Paul.html
Granted, there are a couple 2’s, mostly back in June. But there are also some 5’s, 6’s, and 7’s. And a whole lot of momentum.
Either you haven’t been paying attention, or you are spinning. Which makes you lucky to be a mouthpiece for the current Republican establishment that values neither accuracy or fidelity. A group for which the Ron Paul recruiting revolution has never claimed to carry their baggage.
Relevance. It’s coming at you like a spider monkey!
Ron Paul supporters and neoconservatives agree on many things — we’re for lower taxes, Second Amendment rights, and protecting our borders. Where we differ, and where we feel the need to take power back from the Republicans currently in power, is on foreign and monetary policy. Our current foreign policy is like a household having a SWAT team go around the neighborhood busting down doors and looking for bad guys — it arouses resentment, maybe makes us safer for awhile, but costs far too much for the household to sustain for long. Since Republican leadership cannot pay for this war and this foreign policy in a responsible manner, Ron Paul supporters are intent on taking away the credit card so that adults can put our financial house in order.
I know I don’t feel a lick safer going after bad guys if it means we’ll be broke in 10 or 20 years.
Russ,
Paul isn’t a libertarian. He ran as president as that in the 80’s. Nothing to do with drugs at all.
We are trying to wake up West Virginians/Americans to the fact we are losing freedom here while we “free” Iraq.
See the irony??
Sen. Sprouse, if you have taken an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, it is my duty to inform you that you have violated that oath by what you advocate. The U.S. Constitution does not authorize any war to be conducted outside of an express declaration of war by the Congress, and Congress has NOT declared war on Iraq. Congressman Ron Paul offered the Congress a declaration of war, and Congress did not take that Constitutional route.
It is you who are “out of touch” with reality — a reality founded in the Constitution.
Further, you self-servingly equate withdrawal from Iraq with “surrender.” But the U.S. is the aggressor in Iraq, and as anyone who watches TV news knows, Iraq has never attacked the U.S.; even Bush admits this. An aggressor cannot “surrender,” only the attacked country can “surrender.” Since Iraq’s government has already “surrendered” to the U.S. federal government, and the U.S. government has already toppled Saddam Hussain’s regime — which was held out by the current administration as a “win” — then there is no longer any reason to remain in Iraq, or for my fellow Americans to continue to lose their money and their lives on a civil war which is not ours!
You lie when you say Ron Paul does not have more than 2% of Republicans on his side. You must be aware that he polls nationally at 5%, and in NH, now at 8%. But that is only polls taken of people who have land-lines. And by your admission, Ron Paul supporters are signing up to be on the ballot in “droves.” Surely these two contradictory statements cause some sort of cognitive dissonance in your brain. Where are the “droves” coming from, if he only has 2%?
You state: “But, more importantly, Ron Paul lines up with the liberal media and the Democrats on surrender in Iraq.” Again, you are completely out of touch with reality. The Democrats are barely discussing withdrawal — Obama and Hillary won’t even commit to withdrawing the troops fully until 2012 or later. So why smear Ron Paul with the term “liberal”? As you well know, he is the ultra-true conservative, one who wants limited government, and to follow the Founders’ advice to avoid entangling alliances with foreign countries. Withdrawing from an unconstitutional war would be one step in the true conservative direction.
Anyone who takes an objective look at the history of the conflict the U.S. government started in Iraq will realize that it is the U.S. government’s policies which have cause Iraq to “implode” already. And all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can’t put it back together again — the crazy thing is to waste more money, more years, and real peoples’ lives just to “save face” — and “saving face” is the only thing you are really advocating.
Ron Paul appears to be the only sane man in the race, on both sides of the aisle of the insane two-party system. The problem is, in a world where mainstream politicians like you advocate actual sedition and disobeying the constitution, this sane man is smeared as “out of touch.” But my guess is, it is you and the rabid warmongers who are out of touch with Americans, 70% of which want the Iraq “war” to end.
Lifetime Republican here. Decades of voting straight ticket. Voted for both Bushes in every election they ran in.
I’m not sure, Senator, if you have any recollection of what Republicans were trying to sell the country just a decade ago: no foreign madness, reduce taxes, get rid of a lot of Federal government. Ron Paul’s on point for all those things.
I don’t believe that he wants to surrender Iraq. He proposed his solution to Iraq, a solution he would follow if passed by Congress. Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican Congressman who sponsored a bill to declare war on Iraq. Only Congress can declare war. They have not. Ron Paul sponsored a bill to declare war. No one voted Aye for that bill in Congress.
When Ron Paul wins, he will do as Congress says to do. If they declare war on Iraq, he will go there , win the war, and come home.
The Republicans here are not even moderate, it seems. You’ve all been overcome by the socialism that is rampant in the party today. Thankfully, us old guys are excited about Ron Paul, and there are way many more of us voting than the polls would ever say.
I was telephone polled on my old landline, and when they asked me who I would vote for, of course I said Giuliani. The Ron Paul upset will be that much more savory when the liberal Republicans get the wind knocked out of them.
And some would say, warmongering neocons like yourself has hijacked the GOP and Ron Paul is trying to rescue it.
Surrender to who? The Evil Hitler™ Saddam Hussein is dead. His government has been overthrown for years. Al Qaeda in Iraq is out of business, the former Sunni insurgency have been befriended. The U.S./Iran backed Maliki government is doing just great. The Kurds have been friendly all along.
There is no one to surrender to.
We already won.
I suppose to you not “surrendering” means the right to occupy someone else’s country forever. Well you don’t have that right, and whether Paul or Giuliani wins, the empire will not be able to afford to stay anyway.
No matter how much the radio talking heads and the MSM tries to make it seem as though Benito or the other chick-hawks have real support, the truth is that Americans are not going to vote for more war.
Unless Ron Paul is at the head of the Republican ticket, they are going to be routed this coming election. The neo-conned Republican Party keeps gulping down the Hannity / Limbaugh Kool-aid of “winning” the so called war on terror and saying that those who are not for attacking Iran hate the troops. Are the Republicans saying that 70% of the Americans are America haters, or other such rubbish?
“That Ron Paul’s fundraising is unbelievable. Please. Lyndon LaRouche would haul in millions as well and his candidacy probably had a better chance of winning than Paul, meaning 0.001%”
So You’re TELLING ME THERE’S A CHANCE!! YEEAAH!
Our Troops Are Human
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvEil9LukKk
Keep Hope Alive For Liberty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TcNuPAQ7wc
Ron Paul voted to go after Bin Laden and those that attacked us. Iraq did not attack us. There is a difference between bringing terrorists to justice and nation building in Iraq. The action in Iraq is costing America too much money, and lives, and is making us less safe at home.
Just watch and listen to the Iraq war vets in the first video listed above.
Put aside your prejudices, open your mind and consider Ron Paul. He has a chance if you vote for him, and encourage others to do so.
Have a wonderful day.
-Marc
the Ron Paul campaign is now adding crow to the menu for those reporters and washington politicos who Must toe the party line and go along to get along. so please make your predictions about the Ron Paul campaign proudly and loudly so we can serve you better as the primaries commence.
our middle east foreign policy has brought a hefty serving of blowback (c.i.a. terminology) against our nation and our men and women in the military are paying with their lives.
but the washingtonians dont rightly care as long as their children arent serving in the military.
I am disappointed at seeing your dismissal of Dr. Paul’s campaign. I am a registered Republican, but have not voted for a Republican for President in the last two presidential elections due to the party leaving behind the principles of limited government and no longer following the constitution. Dr. Paul believes in these things, and that is why I support him.
His voting record backs up his words. Dr. Paul cured my apathy, and I cannot in good conscience waste my vote on those devoted to increasing federal spending and building a worldwide empire.
Respectfully,
Diana B.
Surrender
Surrender
Surrender
Surrender
Surrender
Since the good senator (I guess) didn’t get that word in enough I have helped out and typed it in a few more times.
BTW Rasmussen has Paul moving upward at 5% not 2% you silly boy!
But don’t surrender yet!
To Russ: You are a spring chicken sir; at least, you must be to make a statement like that. Paul’s views are what the Republican party was all about for most of its existence. I guess I’m much older than many here, but I remember well when the party stood for non-interventionist foreign policy, small government, lower taxes and sound currency.
As for the article, Sprouse is basically admitting that the Republican party is all about war. He states that Iraq would implode if we left; it has already imploded sir. Millions of Iraqis have left and half a million have been killed. Infrastructure will cost half a trillion to rebuild with no oil income in sight to pay for it all.
Sprouse, like most of the new conservatives (or neocons), proposes no method for paying for anything which doesn’t involve adding to our nine trillion dollar “credit card” debt. In case any of you didn’t know, YOU and YOUR childen’s/grandchildren’s/etc. share of that debt is 68,000.00. Have you got that much in your wallet?
Sprouse also forgets that the current own president’s father had good reason not to invade Iraq. His own VP, Cheney, stated back then as secretary of defense that it would be a “quagmire.”
one day amerika will find itself in the grips of a police state where the children of the crowd that today supports george bush and the neocons will also have lost their freedoms like the rest of us.
More recently, there has been the post 9/11 creation of a virtual avalanche of legislation and commissions designed to protect the country at the expense of the Bill of Rights. The two Patriot Acts of 2001 and 2006 and the Military Commission Act or 2006 have collectively limited constitutional rights to free speech, freedom of association, freedom from illegal search, the right to habeas corpus, prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, and freedom from the illegal seizure of private property. The First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments in the Bill of Rights have all been disregarded in the rush to make it easier to investigate people, put them in jail, and torture them if necessary. A recent executive order of July 17th, 2007 goes even farther, authorizing the President to seize the property of anyone who “Threatens Stabilization Efforts in Iraq.” The government’s own Justice Department decides what constitutes “threatening stabilization efforts” and the order does not permit a challenge to the information that the seizure is based on.
My grandfather went to West Point. Both grandads fought in WW2. My father is a asset manager for large institutions. We have been republicans for the last six decades. We want lower taxes and less government growth. I went to MIT and my wife is a PHD economist. We are educated people who will not be supporting fake republicans of your ilk any longer. We now see that you are supporting policies that keep financial pressure on the middle class…from the inflation and debt problem to the ridiuclous tax code that you tacitly support.
Even if it Ron Paul has only 2% he is important because 2% easily could have decided the last two presidential elections. Not to mention 1992 with Ross Perot.
Let’s get it out in the open: I want Ron Paul and I will NOT support Giuliani. Hillary against the Ghoul, I vote for Hillary. Any other Republican I will hold my nose and vote for him, but not Ghoul. Ron Paul voters CAN and WILL stop Giuliani, if not in the primaries, then in November.
When a Real Conservative runs, all the Neocons line up against him. At least we are finding out who the True Conservatives are.
Senator Sprouse,
You couldn’t be more wrong. It’s you and the rest of the holdouts still drinking the Iraq kool-aid who are in fact unelectable. Didn’t you learn anything in 2006?
No one is trying to “hijack” the convention. We are Republican voters supporting a Republican candidate for President.
Just because that candidate supports a traditional Republican foreign policy instead of the interventionist Wilsonian Democrat doctrine that you support doesn’t mean that we don’t have as much right to participate in the WV GOP Convention as you do.
And to call Ron Paul a “media darling” is ludicrous in the extreme. He gets very little media coverage despite his overwhelming support, and even then he’s usually written off by some would-be kingmaker as a ‘long shot’.
To be honest, I’d say that anyone who says that Ron Paul is a “media darling” is so out of touch with reality that they have no business serving as an elected official. You’ve just made me rethink my once-positive view of your competence as a Republican legislator.
Sorry Aaron, Mr. Paul is not the answer !!
Being of Arab decent I can tell you, you do not have the slightest idea what you are talking about.
I will not debate you in this forum, it would be impossible to educate you on the need for the United States to have a presence in the Middle East.
Todd, remember that all candidates have pluses and minuses, it is the total that counts!
It will be a very entertaining day when you eat your words regarding this subject.
Politics are-a-changing because people have finally “had it” with the moronic and powerhungry government.
All Dr. Paul’s supporters are doing is exercising their constitutional right to get involved in the political process. They are actively engaged in dissecting the issues and advocating for what they believe is the best course for our country. They are willing to spend their own time and money to pursue this vision.
And you condemn them. Shame on you. You should be commending them and imploring others get involved.
Perhaps you should be decrying the political apathy that has gripped this country for so long. I think that is far more harmful and dangerous than an impassioned group of political activists can ever be.
“… government of the people, by the people, for the people …”
It’s not about the parties. It’s not about the government. It’s not about the politicians.
It’s all about the people.
I have to disagree that the media is ‘liberal.’ The best way to describe the media is pro-government. The ‘liberal’ media did not scrutinize Bush’s false claims before the Iraq war. Rather, they ignored them. The ‘liberal’ media did not publicize the fact that no congressman who voted for the Patriot Act had time to read it before they voted. The ‘liberal’ media does not harp on the fact that Bush has spent us into a record level of debt.
For the most part the media does not do its purported job of scrutinizing any politician. And most politician’s efforts are to acquire greater power for the government. This should not be surprising as the media is largely held by large corporations. And most corporations are interested in using government power to ensure their survival and discourage competition with their business.
Finally, I would contend that Ron Paul has mostly been ignored by the media. After all, I heard more stories about Fred Thompson, a small time actor and one term Senator, before he entered the race than about Ron Paul while he was actually in the race.
What a joke of an article. To claim that Ron Paul is suggesting a “surrender” in Iraq is laughable! Regardless of how many times the mission in Iraq changed because of proof of Bush’s lies, let’s just consider that getting rid of Saddam was the ultimate objective… We went in, we took control of the country, we captured Saddam, executed him, and we now have occupied Iraq for almost 5 years. The Iraqi government can’t get their assess in order to establish a working government. Is that the US’s fault? So if we leave them to their fate, how exactly is that a “surrender”? (I guess it could be surrendering the oil we worked so hard to secure; or maybe we’d have to surrender all of the rebuilding contracts because we wouldn’t have our troops there to protect these private companies’ workers?)
This is the same twisted logic the Republican party has used over and over again to rally support for military action against every perceived foe of the US. It’s the “Don’t Tread on Me” concept whereby we have to display our military prowess to the world by attacking helpless countries (unconstitutionally, I might add) and reshaping them in our image. It’s the height of arrogance (and criminal) to send the sons and dughters of US citizen’s to die in a campaign that serves only the oil interests of the United States. We certainly are NOT involved in this effort to thwart terrorism, as this campaign is generating more hatred of America in those Arab countries which only breeds more desire for terrorist actions against us. If the Republican party can’t see this, or admit it, then you’re just blind to the truth.
And to suggest that Iraq would implode if we left is ridiculous. The violence against our troops is a result of the fact that WE ARE OCCUPYING THEIR COUNTRY! They are fighting against us! Haven’t enough people already died in this war? It’s interesting how only the US casualities are reported on the news, not the Iraq casualties. We seem to not really care too much about them except when the argument about leaving is brought up, and the “bloodbath” rhetoric begins. But why shouldn’t we just leave these US sympathizers to their fate? We’ve done it before, plenty of times. Hell, that’s one of the biggest reasons they hate us in the first place. Anyone in the Republican party ever stop to consider that?
So to you Senator Sprouse, I say that you are wrong on just about every count in your assessment of Ron Paul and what he wants to do. You won’t agree, of course, as you seem to think the US has the right to use our military power to force the world into line with our needs, but that’s your prerogative. Too bad it’s a proven bad US policy that has created the web of problems we face on a global scale. But when has evidence of a failed policy ever stopped either party from continuing with it? Stupidity isn’t reserved for 1 party, it’s abundant in both. You’re a perfect example of it.
The mere fact that you’re worried about Ron Paul, enough to write an article about him even though you say he has no chance, is very telling. If he’s really got no chance, why the worry? Please answer this question as I would love to know the answer.
Hey Senator, I’ve got $100 that says he wins New Hampshire. Care to put your money (stolen from the tax-payers) where your mouth is?
I didn’t think so.
Oh, and quit referring to pulling out of Iraq as “surrender”. That implies that there’s an actual government we’d surrender to when the fact is we’re fighting a number of different guerillas. With senators like you it’s no wonder this country has gotten so far off track.
Your use of the word “surrender” when you talk about a change in policy is disingenuous. It is a cheap appeal to emotion as opposed to reason.
Did the Brits surrender when they left Basra, with a resulting 90%! decline in violence? Are the Aussies surrendering by pulling their troops out? Did Reagan surrender when he left Lebanon?
The world is desperate for a United States they can trust and admire. Right now what they have, and what you promote, is a bully building an empire.
You said: “Actually, he won’t garner more than 10% ever in any poll that is ever run and actually will most likely remain right where he belongs… among the 2% of contrarian Republicans who are against Bush and Iraq.”
He is already polling at 8% in New Hampshire with a month to go. Still think he won’t EVER poll higher than 10% in ANY poll?
And you must really hate our Founding Fathers considering Ron Paul’s stance on the Iraq War comes directly from their advice. Do you not believe in the Just War theory of Christianity? Because we have been violating it ever since WWII ended including presently in Iraq. I’m sure your constituents would love know that you oppose those very American principles. Are you sure that you are a Republican?
I do not support Ron Paul in the slightest, but I must applaud him for firmly standing for what he believes in and he has avid supporters who aren’t afraid to get behind him.
It is a SHAME that so many GOOD REPUBLICANS in this state are buying into John Kerry, oh excuse me, I mean Mitt Romney.
I would encourage you all to watch Governor Romney’s debates against Ted Kennedy when running for US Senate in Massachusetts. He was very clear on his positions and very passionate about them, in fact, when I watched him I actually believed him. Unlike I do when I watch the current debates– he sat back and watched to see what the Christian Right was going to think of Rudy and then he swooped right in to pick up the pieces and to be “their guy.”
I do not intend this to be mean spirited – the facts are the facts.
Take a look: http://massresistance.org/romney
Ron Paul lines up with the left? Ok, let’s see what the Republican party lines up with the left on…
Guiliani lines up with the left on moral issues…
The party as a whole lines up with the left in terms of the size of government it believes is appropriate…
The only reason we still have a “left” and “right” distinction is because the parties have maintained that relationship relative to one another. The fact of the matter is though that both parties have sifted left in absolute terms over time, which makes you, Senator, nothing but a Democrat in a Republican’s clothing.
Ron Paul is the last hope for America. Period. If he isn’t our next President, I’ll probably leave the country.
Russ,
I’m pretty sure Paul wouldn’t subsidize any form of drug, ever. He wishes to legalize them in order to reduce the vast amount of organized crime associated with the black markets that are created from the drug’s illegality. A lot of similar solutions to our drug war can be found in the example of the 1920’s prohibition of alcohol. For instance, would we know who Al Capone is today had alcohol never been criminalized?
Vic’s quote:
“At the beginning of the convention process, I said an outsider candidate with little support, but with a strong grassrooots organization, could come in and make a statement because of the wide open set-up of our new party primary convention.”
An outsider candidate with little support, but with a strong grassroots organization?
Isn’t that a contradiction in terms?
Anyway, Vic, thanks for the publicity for Ron Paul–I’ve been hoping for it for a while, even if you think democracy in motion is the same thing as hijacking a convention. I guess 9-11 didn’t change the poor use of metaphors.
Ron Paul supporters, take heart: First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.
Olfrt,
Being of Scotch-Irish protestant heritage, I will tell you this in logic you can understand:
You’re wrong.
It’s unwise to write off Ron Paul and the throngs of energized supporters that have created the phenomenon which has been surprising pundits and politicians alike.
It is unwise because electorally, Ron Paul is nothing short of a gift to the Republican Party. while Republicans that have both been sipping and serving the Kool Aid for the last 8 years see Paul as nothing more than an oddity, they themselves have been
I love nonsense like the balderdash written by Vic Sprouse because it crystalizes why the Republican party is, and has been, so disappointing. It shows all of us who have to pick up the pieces from their mismanagement of both the party and the country what not to become.
Sprouse was 1st elected on the wave of GOP success durring the 1994 Republican Revolution, a time when a then moribund GOP used—like Ron Paul—the message of traditional freedom and responsibility to shock the World.
I remember being in political science classes at the time at the University of Minnesota, arguing with professors like Steven Smith that the GOP was going to clean the democrats clock. Of course, they all laughed it off. Unfortunately for those democrats—uh, I mean professors—the Contract with America touched on something that America always responds to, and opponents always underestimate. Liberty.
Ron Paul does what Gingrich and Dick Armey did in 1994. He simply appeals to the natural inclinations of America. He speaks simple truth to complex power, and people respond. The efficacy of this strategy has a long history of success.
Now, the irony is that Mr. Sprouse chides Ron Paul and his supporters as being a panglossian fringe, doomed to the inevitability of failure, while he seems to support candidates for President that call for an expansion of a war that 70% of Americans oppose. I don’t think I need to elaborate on the wisdom of that electoral stratagem.
Of course, Sprouse is leaving his office this year. Another curiosity it seems, as his political career mirrors the larger era of the Republican Revolution of 1994. The pattern as I have seen it is this: success borne from appeals to liberty, conceit borne through power, and then defeat through disillusionment. Very Euripidean I would say.
I don’t know Mr. Sprouse, so it could be for a variety of reasons that he is leaving office, but it certainly doesn’t seem to be an action someone optimistic about GOP political success would announce.
So, say what you will about the Ron Paul Revolution. But remember, calling a movement irrelevant that is energizing Americans around the ideas of liberty while you yourself are jumping a sinking GOP ship makes your comments, well, irrelevant.
Isn’t is fun to hear a jealous state senator whine?
You don’t have a .000001% of ever being elected to U.S. Congress, something Ron Paul did 31 years ago.
Olfrt,
I am of English and German ancestry and I do not want the US military in either England or Germany. Rest assured I care even less, if that’s possible, about policing your ancestral homeland. I don’t want to pay for it in blood or money. I am an American; I care about where I live NOW. I don’t want to sacrifice my country and my children’s future for Arabs or Israelis. I wish them both well, but that’s it. Not one American dollar, not one American soldier.
“the Islamofascist terrorists are out to get us and will not stop until they kill or at least subjugate us”
Yeah, they’re going to kill us all. And if not, we’ll all be living under Sharia Law. Regardless of how ridiculous the scope of this notion is, let’s not ask the real question which is WHY do they want to kill us? If we did, we might just have to point the finger back at our own foreign policy failures. But we can’t be blamed for this, can we? Rudy G. said it wasn’t our fault.
“… (Ron Paul is) totally out of touch with the reality of what can be achieved on the domestic front.”
American optimism. It’s great isn’t it? This is the same thinking that Rudy had when talking about the “Fair Tax” in one of the debates. He basically said “I don’t know much about it… but it would be too hard to implement now”. That’s leadership folks! Forget about the fact that we’ve bypassed the Constitution at every turn. Let’s just keep going as usual because it’ll be too hard to change anything now. Great attitude! And when we go broke because of all of the f’ing around we’ve done, then you’ll all be standing there saying “Why didn’t somebody do something to change this?”
“The next thing we have to worry about is a lot of these people filing to run for legislative and local offices and becoming potential embarassments for the party…”
Like the Republcian party shouldn’t be embarrassed by what George Bush has done to it over the last 7 years? You’re going to worry about being embarrassed by a bunch of people standing up and saying that we should abide by the Constitution? What country do you live in again?
“I am a conservative and a realist. I also know that if we compromise too far in the quest to stop Hillary, we will wind up with a third party spoiler candidate who will appeal to a small but crucial percentage of the electorate who insists on casting a “pure” vote of conscience…”
Yeah, god forbid people in America should vote their conscience. The “lesser of 2 evils” mentality has done wonders for this country. And it won’t be too much “compromise” that will spur a 3rd party candidate, it’ll be the stubborness of the Republican party to listen to the American people.
“… and allow Hillary to win with a plurality when she would never win a 2-way race.”
You’re right. Because the Republicans did a masterful job holding onto seats in Congress, and Governorships across America in 2006. And nothing in their policy has changed since then. I can see how you believe Hillary has no chance. It’s called denial.
“That’s why I’m supporting Fred Thompson.”
Good luck with that. Fred’s campaign is really heating up. He’s poised to turn that blind, pre-declaration support into a firestorm at the polls. He’s just laying low right now like he did up until September. He’ll shoot up again soon, don’t you worry.
Ron Paul is above 2% in most polls today, but even 2% will swing an election such as the ones in 2000, 2004, and 1992. Ron Paul supporters will NEVER support Giuliani. If it is Hillary against Giuliani, I will vote for Hillary. Any other Republican I will hold my nose and vote for him, but not The Ghoul. I believe Ron Paul supporters will stop Giuliani, if not in the primaries then in the general election.
I just want to make sure you get your numbers right. In the month of November, Ron Paul has risen to 5-6% in national polls. He’s at 8% in the early primary states of Nevada, South Carolina, and New Hampshire. And don’t forget that the Ron Paul campaign is growing faster than any other candidate, period.
There are reasons to believe that Ron Paul will be well represented in the primaries. He has come in 1st or 2nd place in more straw polls than any other candidate. This suggests that Paul supporters are more likely to vote than other candidates. Also, the polls don’t take into account newly registered republican voters, and this is a large bloc of Ron Paul’s support.
As far as “hijacking” the Republican party, that was done by the neoconservatives. When they took control, they turned the party of limited government into the party of the biggest government we have ever had. Ron Paul is the true conservative who calls for limited government- this is the traditional Republican view.
Senator,
We’ll be sure to keep a slice of humble pie warm for you. Thanks for the motivational speech!
First off I’d like to say that I actually am a resident of West Virginia, Jefferson County thank you very much.
Secondly, whoever said libertarians want to subsidize drugs is poorly informed. Legalizing them would neither encourage or discourage their use, but it would drop the bottom out of their highly inflated black market price leading to less money for gangs/thugs/terrorists and little-to-no reason for druggies to commit crimes to pay for their stupid habit. Libertarians DO NOT want to subsidize anything, let alone drugs.
Thirdly, Olfrt you being of Arab descent does nothing to bolster your argument, thats the same as saying you have to be in the military to criticize it or a woman to criticize abortion. Its a lame debate tactic, period.
And lastly, let me say this about Paul’s position on the war, his main tactic is taking away the talking points of the terrorists. By taking American troops (and our military bases) completely out of the Middle East and stop our subsidizing (again with the subsidies! lol) of Israel (with their military expertise and nuclear weaponry they have currently they should be just fine), it will undercut the radicals in the region and give them a lot less sway among their people. Right now the region is totally swamped in paranoia towards the USA and the moderates/sane people have no voice because the radicals’ predictions of the USA going over there as some sort of permanent “crusade” are being realized to an extent, and thus giving them [terrorists] credibility.
And yes, I am a Ron Paul supporter and have been a Republican since I could vote (2002) and was a Young Republican before even that, helping to register voters for the GOP. So, sorry, Vic. I’m here to stay.
The Republican party is in the minority, (I assume you’re talking about Congress) because the party left the low-tax, low-spend, Reagan, bedrock conservative principles and, (I believe this is the bigger reason), too many Congressional Republicans were soft on illegal immigration. The exit polls taken during the 06 election showed that the #1 issue on voters’ minds was illegal immigration. Iraq was #4.
The solution is most definitely NOT to nominate a candidate who sees no threat posed by Islamofascist terrorism, who wants to abolish the U.S. Dept. of Education and Social Security, (Good Lord, even Reagan himself wouldn’t have supported that!), and, most importantly, wants to prove Bin Laden right by surrendering to terrorists in Iraq. The solution is NOT to nominate a candidate who would reverse the incredible progress made in securing our nation and sabotaging terrorists’ efforts because of phantom rights he perceives as being violated.
The solution is to nominate a candidate who will make every effort to bring domestic spending under control, keep taxes low, initiate tax reform and elimination, fight to win the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and anywhere else we have to fight them, and stop the flow of illegal immigrants across our borders. We also should nominate a candidate who has the courage to reform Social Security before it goes totally broke when the baby-boomers retire and who will reform the health care industry by enacting free-market, capitalist ideas. We need a candidate who has the guts to enact tough spending cuts in sacred cow programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and education. We need a candidate who will nominate Constitutionalist judges, who understands that Roe v. Wade is bad law, and that the decision to restrict, ban, or keep the procedure should be made by each state.
I’m sorry, but Ron Paul does not meet these requirements. Aaron and John A., the single most important issue of our time is the war on terror. We absolutely MUST win it and eradicate terrorists from the face of this earth or all the other issues will become moot. We won’t be here to debate them. I’m stunned that any American could witness what we all witnessed on 9/11/01 and then say, just a few years later, that there is no threat posed by Islamofascist terrorists. I even heard Ron Paul claim that Iran is no threat to us. This is a country whose President has repeatedly threatened Israel and the U.S.! This is a country who is sending terrorists to Iraq to kill American soldiers! I assume a President Paul would just withdraw all troops from around the world and wait on the next 9/11 to happen. That is simply unacceptable if one actually CARES about this country.
Fred Thompson meets these requirements and once the media stops making this election out to be a fashion show, and once Americans hear his ideas and philosophy, I’m convinced a majority (though slim) would vote for him. He espouses the same values that got Reagan elected twice by large majorities.
Senator Sprouse,
Why won’t you allow my comments to appear? I have not used profanity or threatened anyone.
I simply pointed out that Ron’s supporters in this state are Republican voters participating in the WVGOP Convention as is our right, and that just because our candidate supports a traditional Republican foreign policy instead of the Wilsonian Democrat foreign policy you espouse doesn’t mean that we are trying to “hijack” the convention.
Or did you take exception to the fact that I questioned the competence of any elected leader who would say something so off-the-wall as to declare Ron Paul a “media darling”?
“But, he is a media darling and he is a media darling for two reasons. He is different. And, trust me, the media loves ‘different.’ It gives them something to write about.”
Senator, where have you had yuor head buried in the sand? Since when is Ron Paul getting anywhere near the media coverage of Rudy, Mitt, Fred, or John?
He got some nice attention when they announced his Q3 fundraising numbers, as well as the Nov. 5th single day effort, but that’s it. I hear about Rudy and Mitt’s little arguments every single day. I hear about McCain and Thompson regularly, and now, even Huckabee is getting some attention even though he doesn’t have anywhere near the financial support he needs to wage a competetive campaign. And this is on the less biased networks like CNN.
But let’s look at Fox News Channel, and the complete and utter attack on Ron Paul (when they bother to mention him at all).
You’re delusional if you believe Ron Paul is some sort of “media darling”. The fact that you could even write such a thing with a straight face is a mystery. But I guess it’s not surprising, as you’ve now proven that you are worried about him being a real threat, even though you claim he’s not.
At least be honest Senator. Admit he’s a threat or stop the attacks. But I guess honesty hasn’t always been the politicians strong suit. Well, except for a guy like Ron Paul, who’s proven his honesty and committment to the Constitution time and time again. Can you claim the same? I doubt it.
“Immediate surrender” in Iraq, Vic? Since when is ceasing the destruction and military occupation of a nation who has never threatened, attacked, or wanted war with you, termed a “surrender”. You can play games with words all you want, but most Americans want our soldiers to come home and now believe going into Iraq was a mistake that was clearly based on false information. Keep up the good political rhetoric though, Vic. You’ll go far in the Republican Party if you stick to the script.
Hi Mr Sprouse,
You said “he won’t garner more than 10% ever in any poll that is ever run and actually will most likely remain right where he belongs… among the 2% of contrarian Republicans who are against Bush and Iraq”
Would you bet your career on it? If Ron Paul garner more than 10% in any state, would you resign from your senator seat?
It’s just that simple, if he has more than 10% of vote in any state, you will resign.
Deal?
There is no attempted “hijack” going on here, what you see and what you are scared of is democracy at work. Dr. Paul has such logical views that it scares those (like the author) who are afraid of change. Do you honestly think that electing yet another Republican (or Democrat even) will change any of the financial disaster that this country is heading towards? Remember the quote from Albert Einstein:
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
By being afriad to change and be open to a new point of view, you are simply falling right into line with what that quote above says. Elect your war-monger Republicans, or your welfare state Democrats if you want, but please dont be surprised when you get the same results.
Dr. Paul is the only candidate who will force change and I find it crazy that you would question the knowledge of this man who serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. You think that someone who is in those two positions doesnt have a good grasp on what it means to the positive long term well being of this country to end the war?
Also, by the way, your choice of words “Immediate Surrender” are not words used by Paul, but are rather an attempt to tug at the emotions of “surrendering” and the weak and negative connotation it brings. Anyone interested in Ron Paul’s own words on the topic should read his official statement at his website:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/war-and-foreign-policy/
and also go to youtube to listen to him speak about a plan to get out.
Thanks for providing this forum, although I dont agree with your point of view, I respect your rights to it.
Wont win any state?
Want to bet $10 on it?
I will bet you $10 that Ron Paul will get a 1st place finish in either Iowa or New Hampshire, smart guy.
I know more NH and Iowa residents than you do, and they see the writing on the wall. They predict a big Ron Paul finish. As in #1.
So if youre so confident, why dont you put your money where your keyboard is and bet me $10 that Ron Paul wont win any state. I believe he will win one of the FIRST TWO primaries. If you got the stones, visit my blog and let me know. I got a paypal account and everything.
And Olfrt,
The majority of the Arab and Persian street disagree with you. Even the Arab-American community disagrees with you.
And “implode” is what happened to Iraq over a year ago. Theres nothing left over there to implode.
Thats why US troops donate to RON PAUL the most. Cause they are the boots on the ground and they know what direction we nee to go to, and they want RON PAUL to lead the way.
It’s sad, though not surprising, to see Republicans who routinely spit on the Constitution and support an administration that lies to the people more than Bill Clinton did, attack Ron Paul.
I used to be a Republican, but the party I used to cherish has devolved into a party that is now a threat to my liberty, a threat to the value of the dollar, and a threat to national security. In short, it reminds me of the Democratic Party.
A person who seeks limited government, maximum freedom, fiscal sanity, and is against massive spending on American “empire” has nowhere to turn. The Democratic and Republican Parties are largely the same on these issues. That’s why I support Ron Paul - a REAL limited government Republican.
I disagree that coming home from Iraq is surrender. We won the war. What were the reasons given for going into Iraq?
1. WMDs. None there, mission accomplished.
2. Saddam Hussein. Out of power, tried and executed, mission accomplished.
3. Constition and elections. Mission accomplished.
Since we won the war and accomplished all we set out to do, why are we still there? Don’t give me any crap about Islam wanting to subjugate us, we have the most powerful military in the world and we can’t even subjugate Iraq. How will a bunch of cave dwellers accomplish this? Even in the worst case scenario, suppose they could somehow get a nuke into one of our cities. That would cause horrific destruction and loss of life, but do absolutely nothing as far as them taking over America. The idea that they want to take over America and make it a Muslim state is pure hokum. It is propaganda worthy of Pravda. It has no basis in fact.
Olfrt.
You need to understand America NOT the middle east.
The founders declared that we Are NOT to entangle ourselves outside this nation and the affairs of other locations.
B.K.
You agree with everthing that ron paul stands for except Iraq, but you agree with him on the fighting A/Q.
So you are willing to give up your soul over one issue…Iraq? Iraq is controversial for a reason, we toppled a government that didn’t attack us which is against the founders vision.
Think about the Irony…We are fighting for Iraqs independence with American blood while we lose our independence to a a growing government.
BESIDES, RON PAUL ISN’T AN OUTSIDER, HE’S BEEN REPUCLICAN IN TEXAS SINCE THE LATE 70′S.
“The solution is most definitely NOT to nominate a candidate who sees no threat posed by Islamofascist terrorism, who wants to abolish the U.S. Dept. of Education and Social Security, (Good Lord, even Reagan himself wouldn’t have supported that!), and, most importantly, wants to prove Bin Laden right by surrendering to terrorists in Iraq.”
You have absolutely NO idea about Ron Paul’s stance on these issues. If you did you certainly wouldn’t be claiming what you clamin above.
“The solution is NOT to nominate a candidate who would reverse the incredible progress made in securing our nation and sabotaging terrorists’ efforts because of phantom rights he perceives as being violated.”
This just shows how delusional you are. What progress have we made in securing the nation? Our borders are wide open and our government can now spy on us without warrant, can deny us our rights of habeus corpus if they just send us to a prison outside of the US, and can torture us (again, as long as we’re not on US soil). And we’re generating more hatred towards the US with our BS military initiatives overseas. That’s the core of the terrorist activity. Believing that they hate us because we’re “free” is the epitome of naiveté.
“The solution is to nominate a candidate who will make every effort to bring domestic spending under control (Ron Paul wants to do this), keep taxes low (again, Ron Paul), initiate tax reform and elimination (Ron Paul, moreso than any of the others), fight to win the war on terror in Iraq (impossible, but keep hoping), Afghanistan, and anywhere else we have to fight them, and stop the flow of illegal immigrants across our borders (Ron Paul). We also should nominate a candidate who has the courage to reform Social Security before it goes totally broke (Ron Paul has this courage and a plan) when the baby-boomers retire and who will reform the health care industry by enacting free-market, capitalist ideas (Ron Paul is all about free-markets, much moreson than any of the others). We need a candidate who has the guts to enact tough spending cuts in sacred cow programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and education (are you seeing a common theme yet?). We need a candidate who will nominate Constitutionalist judges (R.P), who understands that Roe v. Wade is bad law (R.P.), and that the decision to restrict, ban, or keep the procedure should be made by each state (R.P.).
I’m sorry, but Ron Paul does not meet these requirements.”
Are ALL Republicans as uneducated on the candidates as you? You’re an absolute miracle of misinformation and ignorance. Ron Paul stands for EXACTLY 10 of the 11 things you claim the Republican nominee must have. Are you blind to this or have you just not bothered to look because the Republican party tells you he’s not a Republican?
I mean, come on people. Disagree with Ron about the war if you truly believe we’re doing the right things over there, but don’t lay out a laundry list of things he’s completely in favor of and then claim he doesn’t hold that position. That’s complete and utter dishonesty at a time when this country (and the Republican party in general) needs honesty.
I would hope that you, B.K., would use this rebuttal to better educate yourself on Ron Paul and his policy stances. It might make you a bit more accepting of his candidacy, at least to the point where you could speak honestly about the differences you have with him. Because your post isn’t honest at all.
Just because Mitt and Rudy and McCain have (R)s after their name does not make them republicans. Compare their record to that of a real conservative and you’ll see. Dr. Paul has an impeccable record for voting for freedom. I guess freedom is too scary for the masses. That’s quite sad. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves.
Dr. Paul is completely against all subsidies. To claim that he would subsidize drug use is plain ignorant. How much money have we spend on the “War on Drugs” and why is it drugs are still available? I know, the “surge is working there too!” Prohibition did not work with alcohol, why should it work with another drug?
He’s also a proponent of home schooling. Given how poor Americans are at math and history I can see his point.
Dr. Paul isn’t right on everything but relative to the other candidates on both sides he is THE cure for what ails America. Neither party has it right and the moderates tend to pick the worst ideas from each side. For the record, he’s not running for President of the Republican party, he’s running for the United States of America.
Ron Paul dwarfs all others in contributions from active and retired military.
Hillary Clinton Dwarfs all others in contributions from military industrial contractors and suppier’s
Which of these two groups takes an oath to defend the constitution from all enemies, foriegn and domestic?
You idiot “Government before America” Neo cons have your heads so far up your socialist, big government asses that you can’t even see what a bunch of hypocritical, ignorant pussies you are.
I appreciate your candor in backing big-government Republican policies. We need more Republicans to step up and be honest that the Republican Party is in full agreement with the Democratic Party about big government; they’re just in slight disagreement on the details.
Finally, the Republican Party can stop using libertarian rhetoric and marketing when they want to get elected, only to abandon those principles once elected.
I would say stance is brave since the libertarian marketing has been so effective, but it is true that people are catching on to the fact that Republicans don’t mean it anyway, so perhaps your stand is just more practical.
Thanks again for your outstanding honesty!
Senator, You may be right about West Virginia…but not America…you’ll be sorry you tossed your cards in with the losing side…the neocons…or neoliberals or whatever it is the republican party has supposedly become is way out of whack with reality. The party of Lincoln, Goldwater and Reagan is returning and Ron Paul is leading the charge!
From #1: “…most of his supporters are paranoid, delusional, and totally out of touch with reality. As for Rep. Paul, he is hopelessly naieve about the world in which we live (yes, the Islamofascist terrorists are out to get us and will not stop until they kill or at least subjugate us)…”
They’re out to get us!!! Aaaaaaaahhhhh!!!!
Wow. Who’s paranoid? After all, how are they all gonna get across the ocean? How many of them would it take to subjugate us? Millions?
Seriously, how are they going to get across the ocean? We would sink every last ship or down every last plane before they got here. Please. Please, some sanity.
The Republican Platform has always been about constitutionally limited government and fiscal responsibility, not to mention non-interventionism (foreign or domestic). Of all the candidates, only Ron Paul has had a history of voting record to support that Platform. Mr. Sprouse’s illogical post shows how far the Party has strayed from its roots.
B.K: How do you want to bring spending under control without cutting on military spending? That seems like 2 mutually contradicting ideas…
Anyway, Paul proposed to catch Bin Ladin. Not destroy 2 other countries, incite hatred, create millions of new terrorist and let Bin Ladin go. Do you really believe that half a million of people who died in Iraq because of the war - were terrorists? This is a very stupid idea of erradicating terrorism. Do you have any idea what would attacking Iran bring? I can assure you that the USA would be economically destroyed within 2 years. Argentina-type collapse combined with suicide attacks everywhere all the time.
It seems to me a good idea to vote for a candidate, who would actually try to CATCH Bin Ladin, who has a reasonable plan how to get spending under control, who is so economically knowledgable that he is invited on Fox Business Channel even in relation to current weak dollar. Who has an idea how to reform Madicaid/social security - unlike the others, they all want the reform, but don’t know how.
Actually, Paul seems to meet your requirements. Fred Thompson…- has no fricking idea of the current economic problems. He thinks there are problems with mandatory spending. Sure. Any plan? No. ‘Strong dollar policy’..sure. How to achieve that? No idea. See Paul, see his dialogs with Greenspan and Bernanke. No, Paul is not an economics professor. Only the others are totally illiterate.
B.K. mischaracterizes Ron Paul’s positions while his description of the requirements for a candidate with solutions unwittingly describes Ron Paul.
Just one case in point. Ron Paul does care about this country as his impeccable record of the last 30 years attests. He would bring the troops home not to “wait for another 9/11″ as B.K. attempts this tired neocon red herring, but so that we could focus on defending THIS country instead of paying to blow up and rebuild other countries in the hopes of…well…who knows other than to perpetuate anti-Americanism around the world.
So, for the sake of argument, let’s just accept B.K.’s “requirements.” Let’s also set aside the fact that Thompson has failed to impress, and has lost any momentum he had stumbling out of the gates.
Fred Thompson is probably the best of the other candidates. He’s pretty good on federalism, but unfortunately he’s a major think-tanker for the neocons.
Fred Thompson is a flip-flopper on McCain-Feingold. He was for it before he was against it.
Fred Thompson wants to “partially privatize” Social Security. What does that mean? Who knows. Ron Paul is the only one with a plan to “save” social security by reducing spending enough to meet future liabilities. Part of that is reduction of the foreign-policy/military aggression.
Of course there is a threat from terrorists. This threat is made worse by meddling and blowback. The neocons know this and love it because they actually want to expand the conflict, just like the extremists. They have the same ultimate goal.
Fred Thompson and the neocons would have us believe that this threat can be addressed by spying on Americans at home and meddling abroad. If current Republicans persist in this fantasy, and stick with the discredited policies of Bush, then they deserve to be overrun by the newcomers Paul is bringing into the party. And if we don’t elect Paul, then we all will get the government they deserve.
On “aligning with the liberal media” well, all we can say about the liberals is that a stopped clock is right twice a day. They are only against the Bush policy because they are the opposition. Ron Paul supporters don’t blame America. We blame the government foreign policy and neocons who have hijacked it from decent Americans.
“the Islamofascist terrorists are out to get us and will not stop until they kill or at least subjugate us”
And Ron Paul people are delusional, paranoid, and out of touch?
“if we compromise too far in the quest to stop Hillary, we will wind up with a third party spoiler candidate who will appeal to a small but crucial percentage of the electorate…that’s why I support Fred Thompson”
Jim Mullins…WHO ARE YOU?!?!?!
Russ Snyder said: “Then they have taken weird positions such as legalizing drugs. I personally don’t mind a person exercising the freedom to ruin their health (assuming that they’re an adult), but I resent them wanting me to subsidize their habit.”
Libertarians don’t want you to subdize any drugs - FDA approved or otherwise. We just want the government to refrain from criminalizing activities that don’t harm anyone else - a.k.a. a joint on the porch.
Maybe if we stopped spending billions putting people in prision for smoking pot, we would have more money for education, health care and roads.
Again, Libertarians don’t want the government to subsidize any drug. None. We also don’t want the government to criminalize drug use (put the SWAT teams away). However, we strongly support adequate punishment for people who commit crimes against people or property — whether they are taking drugs or not. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Excuse me guy, but are you off your meds? Ron Paul won’t poll better than 10%? You will be feeling VERY STUPID HERE SHORTLY DUMMY as Ron Paul is already polling at 8% in New Hampshire - that puts him fourth there, and 7% in Nevada - that puts him third there. He’s only been advertising in those locations for three weeks and went from 2% to 8%. When the next few polls come out he will BREAK DOUBLE DIGITS as name recognition is the ONLY THING HOLDING HIM BACK, not the message. The message is what is propelling him. We can blame the name recognition on the biased media and neo-con Republicans like you.
Ron Paul is a “real” conservative. Pro-Life, Pro-2nd-Ammendment, Low-Taxes, Low-Spending (this includes spending on stupid and needless wars), pro-individual-liberties, and being concerned about the dollar.
Lastly, Ron Paul voted against the Patriot Act, a new law that allow the US government to spy on its citizens, can you say that about yourself? I bet you are one of them who voted for it right? And since you also voted for the war, something that 70% of Americans are now against, wouldn’t it be easier to say it is you who is out of touch? We’ll see what you have to say when Ron Paul raises $16 million this quarter and comes in first in fundraising.
If you want to believe the NeoCon lies that are destroying the GOP and making a mockery of the party of Abraham Lincoln, then feel free to reread the above article.
However…
If you are ready to take back your country from the corporations that want to sell your interests to the highest foreign bidder, the war machine that has cost countless lives and a trillon dollars to date, the federal reserve who devalues our currency daily, and the members of the new world order who want to do away with our national sovereignty, you should visit Ron Paul’s campaign website (http://www.ronpaul2008.com) and make a contribution. After which, visit RonPaul.meetup.com and get connected with a Ron Paul group in your area. Wave signs, hold banners, pass out materials.. do your part to save this country.
If you love this country, it’s your duty to save it from fear mongering simpletons like Vic Sprouse.
B.K.: considering that the US were paying many middle eastern people (I believe Ladin and Hussein included) to ..well.. kill Russian/communist/USA unfriendly people/politicians/soldiers some decades ago… doesn’t your position to Iran sending terrorist to Iraq appear a little hypocritical?
September 11, 2001 the beginning of the First World War
I have been one of the most fortunate people on earth, to have been born and lived in the United States of America. Son of immigrant parents who suffered the estrangement (by choice) from their homeland, parents, brothers and sisters, and extended families. This has taught me to appreciate the freedoms I have experienced.
Today there is a group that would destroy that freedom for there fanatical beliefs. Where do we find those that would destroy the greatest nation on the planet today? They reside in all nations, small and large, in all cities and towns of all countries, in other words they are to be found world wide. I believe the largest concentration of those that I refer to as the fanatical enemy reside in the Middle Eastern countries.
Our President, when confronted on September 11, 2001 by this fanatical movement made the correct decision. Our President determined we must finally address the enemy and to make certain they never again attacked the United States. I believe our military presence in the Middle East, regardless of the name of the country, was essential to make certain this was accomplished.
We must now put aside our political differences and support what has been successful.
Remember when you lay your love ones down to sleep each night that there are fanatical zealots that would rather you and your families never awoke again. Our president has endured the wrath of his enemies’ both foreign and domestic to make certain that we do awake each morning in the greatest and the safest nation in the world.
I would like to say Thank You!!
Ron Paul and all with simular isolationist views are simply wrong.
A skinny young boy lives down the street from me. Everyday (at least in the summer when school is out), when I walk from my house to the courthouse, this crazed, unsettled little boy yells unprovoked and unsolicited threats at me from his fenced-in yard. He has been doing this for two (2) years. His skin is dark, so he might be one of those I-Slam-The-Fascists I’ve been reading about in this thread.
I have no intention of crossing the street, climbing his fence and dispatching this little pest. You see, I am 6′5″ and a dedicated, long-time weight trainer with a strong background in competitive athletics.
Subjectively, I believe that this poor emaciated kid thinks he is threatening me. What a hoot. Objectively, of course, he is not a threat to me at all or to any other rational adult for that matter. What’s more, I realize that, and don’t take his idle and empty threats as posing imminent danger to me.
I have read Ron Paul’s position on asymetrical warfare, and as I can tell, he does not dismiss threats to America from without as unimportant. He simply understands that the wrong foreign policy of military intervention can cause or invite or contribute to aggression against the United States. So he simply says, “don’t go in the kid’s yard”. Just be strong enough and well-prepared enough so that when he grows up and if he jumps the fence and is stupid enough to attack you, you can beat the living tar out of him in a nanosecond.
Makes sense to me.
Vic wrote that Ron Paul “…won’t garner more than 10% ever in any poll that is ever run…”
From Zogby’s Nov. 14-17 blind poll of 1,009 likely Repub., Dem. and Indep. voters: Paul 33%, Giuliani 19%, Romney 15%, Thompson 13%, undecided 20%. Paul lead the other three by big margins in virtually every demographic including:
born again Christians 30% (Giuliani 23%)
Catholic 30%
Protestant 33%
Jewish 17%
military families 33% (Giuliani 18%)
NASCAR fans 33% (Giuliani 28%)
women 35% (Giuliani 17%)
African-Americans 41% (Giuliani 9)
From the same data, of 389 likely Repub. primary or caucus voters: Giuliani 34%, Thompson and Romney 22% each, Paul 13%, undecided 9%.
So his positions have big appeal. He polled 1% or less six weeks ago and is now 5% nationally and 8% in NH which reflects also that his name recognition is rapidly improving. In practical terms, the early primaries and caucuses are half a lifetime from now.
Paul’s upward trajectory contrasts with a fizzling Thompson campaign that has the allure of a heart attack, a McCain “resurgence” that means that his campaign is now out of the toilet and a seriously flawed uber-liberal, authoritarian, anti-gun, pro-abortionist Giulian whose poll numbers are plummeting before the firemen he betrayed (those who lived) have attacked him on the campaign trail.
Paul’s opponents’ fundraising is dying while his is skyrocketing. Now why might that be?
Paul has been and will continue to be responsible for many new Republican registrations on a daily basis. Who cares whether they have been Democrats or Independents if they now support a limited government candidate who would defend liberty? See the glass half full, not half empty. Let’s grow our party rather than let it die. Americans want out of Iraq now. Better to join hands with those former Democrats before the neo-cons who have weakened our military’s ability to defend our nation and who have destroyed its finances.
The single greatest justification for our federal government is to preserve our God-given liberty. If it not only can’t do that but effectively becomes a domestic enemy on that front, we might as well throw up our hands and be ruled by the Chinese.
In conclusion, Vic, you can eat your words now or later, but you’re going to look like an idiot who picked the wrong horse. Some advice - choose liberty; choose it every time.
If you want to believe the NeoCon lies that are destroying the GOP and making a mockery of the party of Abraham Lincoln, then feel free to reread the above article.
However…
If you are ready to take back your country from the corporations that want to sell your interests to the highest foreign bidder, the war machine that has cost countless lives and a trillon dollars to date, the federal reserve who devalues our currency daily, and the members of the new world order who want to do away with our national sovereignty, you should visit Ron Paul’s campaign website (http://www.ronpaul2008.com) and make a contribution. After which, visit RonPaul.meetup.com and get connected with a Ron Paul group in your area. Wave signs, hold banners, pass out materials.. do your part to save this country.
If you love this country, it’s your duty to save it from fear mongering simpletons like Vic Sprouse.
Perhaps you should educate yourself on the history of the Republican party. Replay some of those old Ronald Reagen videos, then watch Ron Paul.
And being in touch with reality would be nice, too. Admitting that having attacked a country which had never attacked us was wrong, and correcting that mistake by withdrawing is not retreat. It’s doing the right thing, but then I guess most politicians wouldn’t be familiar with that concept.
Will you please cease with the lame pro-Fred comments? His candidacy is dead. Dropping like a rock it’s only a matter of time before he calls it quits. Its’ very obvious the guy doesn’t like campaigning - too much work for the lazy guy. There’s no energy there at all, and even your precious Fox News doesn’t like him.
If you want to believe the NeoCon lies that are destroying the GOP and making a mockery of the party of Abraham Lincoln, then feel free to reread the above article.
However…
If you are ready to take back your country from the corporations that want to sell your interests to the highest foreign bidder, the war machine that has cost countless lives and a trillon dollars to date, the federal reserve who devalues our currency daily, and the members of the new world order who want to do away with our national sovereignty, you should visit Ron Paul’s campaign website (http://www.ronpaul2008.com) and make a contribution. After which, visit RonPaul.meetup.com and get connected with a Ron Paul group in your area. Wave signs, hold banners, pass out materials.. do your part to save this country.
If you love this country, it’s your duty to save it from fear mongering simpletons like Vic Sprouse.
I’m not sure why this was removed the first time I posted, but I’ll try again:
If Ron Paul is irrelevant, then why did you see fit to attack him.
Though Dr. Paul is bringing together people from all backgrounds, this is not a phenomenon of liberals, and libertarians attempting to hijack the republican party as many conspiracy theorist suggest.
His support comes from people who long for freedom from a government that has grown, and continues to grow out of control, with complete disregard to the constitution and the basic rights of individuals.
I supported Bush in 2000, and considered the war in Iraq to be necessary. After careful consideration and research over the years — mainly thanks to Ron Paul and his vast knowledge of foreign affairs — I have come to acknowledge the error in my thinking.
the term libertarian, to me, seems to be the replacement for conservative, since neo-conservatives and republicans have drifted dangerously close to the big-government, big-spending, interventionist, progressive liberal democrats.
I am extremely grateful that we have an honest man of unmatched integrity challenging the status quo, and attempting to return this country to the Constitutional Republic it once was.
I would have to respectfully disagree, Senator. I am far more worried about the survival of our republic than I am about a possible Iraq “implosion” or a “loss” in this war. Wars cost lots of money, money we don’t have. So not only is our economy under threat (have you seen the plummeting dollar lately?), but our sovereignty is under direct threat by trade agreements such as “NAFTA” and by the UN. Our federal government has been overrun by internationalism, and this is of great worry to me, as the natural trend for a society is to centralize its power. The only way to sever the power line between our federal government and the globalists is to return to state’s rights. If we do not return to state’s rights, a global government will one day trump our constitutional laws, and all of our freedoms may be lost. I assure you that this day is not as far away as one might think, and, in fact, it is frighteningly close. So, if you don’t like Ron Paul that is your choice, but if you love your country, which I assume you do, then you are forced to embrace state’s rights. Call me crazy, call me an idiot, I don’t care, but please God people we have to move past petty differences and intellectual vanity, and come together to discuss how we can protect our national sovereignty. Ron Paul is the ONLY advocate of state’s rights running for president, so its time to start moving past trivialities and thinking about whether or not it is worth it to you to vote for a man you don’t necessarily like in order to defend the republic.
I find it interesting that people like Vic Sprouse (who likes to write about how out of touch Margaret Workman is with the “common man”) are so out of touch with much of the Republican Base.
Ronald Reagan was a friend and supporter of Ron Paul. Look it up. . .
I have voted for ONE democrat in my life because that candidate for a Judgeship refused to take any money from any one for his campaign - and he was a pretty reasonable fellow as democrats go.
Otherwise, I’ve voted Republican 99% of the time and third party a couple times.
However, I am highly displeased with BOTH PARTIES at this time. Further, I am far from alone. My boss has been a card carrying member of the Republican party for 30 years and has been very active in local politics as a Prosecutor and Judge.
Both of us are huge Ron Paul supporters and agree with 90-95% of his positions. But, then again, we actually read the Constitution, which I doubt Mr. Sprouse does with much regularity.
Neither myself, nor my boss are alone in our support of Dr. Paul - and I don’t think anyone would refer to us (and the other local supporters I know) as unreasonable or “crazy” or “fringe”.
Is Dr. Paul going to win the election or even the nomination? Not likely.
However, until such time as Mr. Sprouse and others in the Republican Party realize that more than “2%” of their base (in my experience, it’s more like 20-50%, depending on the locale) is completely disgusted with the Republican Party, the party is going to continue down paths which alienate many of the voters.
Finally, Mr. Sprouse apparently hasn’t seen the poll numbers in N.H., Nevada and Iowa. It would appear that Dr. Paul will do considerably better than 2%. Further, Zogby is predicting 15%+/- in N.H.
That’s pretty good for a man some have referred to as a “kook”. It’s also pretty good for someone who gets 1/3 to 1/4 the amount of time in the debates as Ghouliani. Seems the press isn’t as fascinated with Dr. Paul as Mr. Sprouse would have us believe.
I would also be curious to know whether Mr. Sprouse has served in the military and on the front lines in war.
If not, I believe he should go experience it firsthand. After all, if you REALLY support a war, shouldn’t you be willing to go “do your part?”
The fact that this board is censoring pro Ron Paul related posts is reason enough to believe the Vic Sprouse stands against the bill of rights and the citizens of WV.
Ron Paul is actually polling at 8% (fourth) in New Hampshire. He will break double digits there in a week or so.
Thank you for your opinion in this article, it is always great to see people such as yourself participate in the political process.
I and many other die hard conservatives are very worried about where the Republican party is heading. As of now it look like the liberals are now using Guliani and Romney to hijack our party.
We need a true conservative. I wish the media would stop trying to blackout the issues of all of these candidates.
Another question I have is, why is the controlled media and voices, trying to promote these liberal candidates, such as Romney, Guliani, McCain, Huckabee, as conservatives? What is going on here.
I am seeing Ron Paul signs and bumper stickers. Haven’t seen any other candidates signs or anything. After reading this article I am very worried about the future of our ‘new’ republican party. I am changing my mind, and going to check out Ron Paul, because, I cannot in good conscious vote for the other candidates or another party.
I am hurting, my taxes are ridiculously high, business is down, the economy is contracting, and these party’s and politicians are ruining this country. We need help.
“Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party.”
This liar uses the word “surrender” three times in this nonsensically dishonest little screed. Warmongers always lie.
To quit committing mass murder and go home is not surrender. Pretending that a bunch of poverty-stricken third-world religious fools are going to take over the world and destroy us if we don’t keep committing mass murder is so insane that Ron Paul’s growing success is really not too surprising. They would like to destroy us only because we keep murdering them in their homes, which this cowardly moron wants to continue.
The pile of sadistic crap who wrote this is, of course, a parasitic bully feeding himself off the extortion-racket called taxation and no doubt finds coercion the preferred method for dealing with other humans. I wonder when he’ll be shipping out to help conduct the mass murder campaign to take over the planet’s major oil fields.
Hi Senator, Ron Paul is actualy Pro-Life, Pro-2nd-Ammendment, lower-taxes, and lower spending. Isn’t that Republican?
OLFRT,
you refuse to acknowledge that the root cause of terrorism against us is now and has always been western occupation and intervention of middle eastern nations.
Why are we in Iraq?
It had NOTHING to do with 9/11
Mission objectives
Remove any WMD’s accomplished
Have free elections accomplished
Remove Sadam Hussien accomplished
There where no Al quaida in Iraq before we aggressively invaded it
The 9/11 thugs were from Saudi Arabia
Oil was at $33 dollars a barrel before we invaded
The Republican party NEEDS to be hijacked and flown to reality if the senator and those who believe as he are in charge of it. None seem to have a clue as to the truth and obviously none are aware that the real threat to the U.S. is the Republicans and Democrats, the two wings of the Socialist Party, USA. They actually think that there is a difference between Fred, Rudy, Mitt, etc. and Hillary, Barack, John, etc. A sorry bunch of damned fools!
Time for you RP die-hards to stop listening to Limbaugh, Hannity, Hagee, Robertson, et al and LEARN THE TRUTH. You’re giving my children and grandchildren (and your own) and my country up to serfdom! May God forgive you if you don’t wake up.
Only one man is not playing the Globalist’s tune: Ron Paul! Only one man has a real commitment to America: Ron Paul! Only one man is speaking the truth: Ron Paul! Only one man has a working, proven plan (known to most as the Constitution): Ron Paul! This is the real reason the RP is running scared!
Calling Ron Paul an “isolationist” is like calling the nice guy who lives across the street from you a “hermit” because he doesn’t steal your newspaper, hit on your wife, do doughnuts on your front lawn on his motorcycle or throw bricks through your windows. Ron Paul is a non-interventionist, like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
Hi, I think Ron Paul voted against the Patriot Act that allows the federal government to spy on its citizens. How did you vote?
Sir,
Two questions:
1) You say that Dr. Paul supports “surrender” in Iraq. Who is he going to surrender to? Last I checked there was a sovereign Iraqi government who we support.
2) You claim Dr. Paul’s support is at 2% nationwide. Which poll are you relying on? According to Pollster.com, his nationwide average is 5.3% and he hasn’t polled at 2% or below since before Nov. 1st. http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Rep-Pres-Primary.php
First of all thanks for your thoughts and thanks for making it clear that you have nothing against Dr. Paul’s supporters.
You make a fundamental error, however, in thinking that Congressman Paul’s supporters like him because he is different. Most of his supporters don’t even care particularly about Paul himself. The important thing is not the man - but the message. He supports the US Constitution. He supports the principles (however archaic they seem to most TV raised consumers these days) that Jefferson, Franklin and Washington espoused. He believes that we are born to be free men and women, and that our rights come from God, not from legislators. He believes that we should base our finances on stable money, not unbacked paper. The list goes on, but the proponent, Ron Paul, is not the focus. The focus is the message.
Senator, you raised your hand and took an oath to God to support exactly the documents and principles that Ron Paul supports. If you don’t believe me, go back and READ the US Constitution. Ask yourself what a man of principle would do. It is never too late to do the right thing.
The war on terror our #1 priority. HA! Please. Anyone who says this is truly deluded by the media and the beltway insiders. If pilots or even passengers were armed, 9-11 would have never happened. If the FBI did their job, 9-11 would have never happened. If we had not been poking around in the business of other nations, 9-11 would have never happened.
Besides, your chances of being attacked and killed by a terrorist is practically zero. Even on the fateful day of September 11th, 2001, your chances of getting killed by a terrorist were 1 in 100,000. You are more likely to get killed by a swarm of bees, a shark, a grizzly bear or a poisonous jellyfish. You are more likely to die from rock climbing, skiing, riding a bicycle or even running. You are more likely to die from riding in an airplane, or even riding in your own car to get a loaf of bread from the supermarket.
Statistically speaking, just like the severe fear of airline travel, the fear of terrorists is quite irrational. The fact of the matter is, you are more likely to die from getting electrocuted by a Tazer-happy police officer, granted extra funds to ‘fight the war on terror’. It is unfortunate to see my fellow countrymen having been turned into scared sheep, trusting the government at all times, all hyperactive about some near infintesimal terrorist threat. I look forward to the day our nation returns to reason and demands their civil liberties back, and also push themselves to run their own lives, instead of some ‘benevolent’ government.
Just a few comments–
I find it funny that Reagan is considered a low-spender. Maybe in comparison to today’s outrageous spending habits, but I hardly think he would be low-spending in the traditional conservative sense.
Another thing that cracks me up– Ron Paul is Republican in the true sense of the word. Most of you have forgotten what Republican means. Today’s Libertarian values are yesterday’s Republican values. Reps are no longer conservative, even though they claim to be. Ron Paul is a true conservative.
I also laugh that BK wants to cut spending on education, but scoffs at getting rid of the Dept. of Education. So we’re going to further under-fund struggling schools, but not let parents, educators, and local communities try new ways to fix the system? We give them less money, but no chance to create a more efficient method of education?
I think some of you need to spend some time thinking on why we have problems with terrorists. No, it is not because they are jealous of our Ipods. It is because of our continued involvement in the middle east. Have we all forgotten history? Or maybe it’s that under-funded school system that isn’t allowed to change.
I’m not very old, and I can name several events within my lifetime that would cause people over there to be angry with us. The biggest one that comes to mind is an apparently completely forgotten event called the Iran-Contra scandal. Did I dream this? How come no one remembers it anymore?
To solve the terrorism problem– stop fooling around in stuff that isn’t our business! Then they will find someone else to hate. We’ll be off their radar.
9/11 was not evidence of the power of our enemies. It was proof of the stupidity of our government.
Pretending that 9/11 requires that we make war all around the world appeals to cowards who love war as long as they are not the ones who will fight it.
Ron Paul is actually polling at 8% in New Hampshire.
Why do you keep removing my post? Apparently you can’t handle constructive criticism. here it is again:
If Ron Paul is irrelevant, then why did you see fit to attack him.
Though Dr. Paul is bringing together people from all backgrounds, this is not a phenomenon of liberals, and libertarians attempting to hijack the republican party as many conspiracy theorist suggest.
His support comes from people who long for freedom from a government that has grown, and continues to grow out of control, with complete disregard to the constitution and the basic rights of individuals.
I supported Bush in 2000, and considered the war in Iraq to be necessary. After careful consideration and research over the years — mainly thanks to Ron Paul and his vast knowledge of foreign affairs — I have come to acknowledge the error in my thinking.
the term libertarian, to me, seems to be the replacement for conservative, since neo-conservatives and republicans have drifted dangerously close to the big-government, big-spending, interventionist, progressive liberal democrats.
I am extremely grateful that we have an honest man of unmatched integrity challenging the status quo, and attempting to return this country to the Constitutional Republic it once was.
Just one question: does saying it make it true?
Does saying that Ron Paul polls at 2% make him poll at 2%? The latest Zogby poll has him at 5% nationally, good enough for 4th place in Nevada and New Hampshire.
Does saying that Ron Paul has 0.001% (100,000:1) chance of winning the nomination make it true? Real money says he’s at 6:1.
And Ron Paul strikes me as the least naive candidate running for president:
Naive says Universal Health Care will work in America.
Naive says we can escape a $10 trillion dollar debt by inventing more money - a debt upon a debt.
Naive says the dollar can lose value exponentially and China, the EU, and the Middle East will still have faith in it.
Naive says suspending habeas corpus will make us safer.
Naive says NAFTA and the WTO will be good for the average American worker.
Naive says we can protect America by stationing troops in hundreds of countries while ignoring our own open borders.
Naive says the War on Drugs benefits people besides cops, drug-lords, politicians, and terrorists.
Naive says the War on Terrorism benefits those outside of the military-industrial complex.
Naive says “Mission Accomplished.”
Senator-
I’m disappointed to see such attacks on a Republican, especially one who defends the Constitution as much as Dr. Paul does. But let’s address some of your talking points…
You claim that Dr. Paul’s fundraising isn’t that impressive. Considering he dwarfs all the other “second tier” candidates combined and nearly matches media darling (we’ll talk about your coining of Dr. Paul as such) John McCain. Without Romney’s massive loans to his own campaign, he’d be near the same fundraising levels as Dr. Paul. Thompson and Guiliani aren’t shining either. I also invite you hop over to RonPaul2008.com and see how he’s doing this quarter. Matching the 3rd quarter contributions that the so called top tier front runners pulled in! He shot for $12 million, I predict he pulls in $16 million this quarter.
A media darling? You’ve got to be kidding. There’s nothing but disdain for Dr. Paul in the media. Ignoring the relative blackout on Dr. Paul in the media, what other candidate garners press with lead-ins like “The dark horse candidate that can’t win his party’s nomination…”
How about Dr. Paul’s “surrender” as you like to put it. How is it a surrender when it was “mission accomplished” over 3 years ago? The fact is, we’re not focusing on Osama (you know, the guy who masterminded the 9.11 attacks), we’ve moved into a country that was no threat to us (Iraq). And now we’re posturing against another country with little incentive, will, desire or means to do us harm (Iran).
And don’t forget that recent polls have shown a majority of Republicans favor withdrawal in 6 months or less.
And as for your predictions regarding his performance in the primaries and polls, you’re talking likes it’s April or May. He’s got support and its growing. He’s polling 4th in NH, 5th in Nevada. We, early Paul supporters, never dreamed he would be polling so well. He’s polling higher than other former party nominees have, you can’t count him out yet.
BK,
I first thought you were being sarcastic when you said Ron Paul doesn’t meet any of your requirements. Let’s take a look.
low-tax, low-spend, Reagan, bedrock conservative principles, illegal immigration, reform Social Security before it goes totally broke when the baby-boomers retire and who will reform the health care industry by enacting free-market, capitalist ideas, nominate Constitutionalist judges, who understands that Roe v. Wade is bad law, and that the decision to restrict, ban, or keep the procedure should be made by each state.
These are all things Ron Paul would accomplish! And much better then any of the other candidates!
and ‘phantom rights he perceives as being violated’ - you can find these ‘phantom rights’ in our constitution.
and if you really want to secure America, wouldn’t it make more sense to not thin out our army around the world, but bring them home to protect us here? And to stop killing innocent Iraqi’s which brews more hatred?
And senator, 70% of the nation wants the war to end. Can you explain to me how the republicans expect to win a presidential election running a pro-war campaign? Oh, and Ron Paul is polling over 2%. And clearly you don’t support people joining in the political process, because never before have the people supported a candidate in such a passioned way. And calling Ron Paul a media darling is probably the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read.
If Ron Paul is irrelevant, then why did you see fit to attack him.
Though Dr. Paul is bringing together people from all backgrounds, this is not a phenomenon of liberals, and libertarians attempting to hijack the republican party as many conspiracy theorist suggest.
His support comes from people who long for freedom from a government that has grown, and continues to grow out of control, with complete disregard to the constitution and the basic rights of individuals.
I supported Bush in 2000, and considered the war in Iraq to be necessary. After careful consideration and research over the years — mainly thanks to Ron Paul and his vast knowledge of foreign affairs — I have come to acknowledge the error in my thinking.
the term libertarian, to me, seems to be the replacement for conservative, since neo-conservatives and republicans have drifted dangerously close to the big-government, big-spending, interventionist, progressive liberal democrats.
I am extremely grateful that we have an honest man of unmatched integrity challenging the status quo, and attempting to return this country to the Constitutional Republic it once was.
Take a look at the election results in Australia to get a picture or what’s in store for America. The conservative Prime Minister just got ignominiously booted in favor of a hard-left Socialist. Why? The War! The Australians chose a Socialist over continuing the war in Iraq, despite 12 years of economic success under Howard, which is a lot more than Bush can claim.
America will do the same thing next November unless we wake up and vote for the only anti-war conservative: Ron Paul. He is America’s only hope because he is the only candidate running for President who is both opposed to continuing the war in Iraq and supports a conservative vision for America.
The alternative is President Hillary or President Obama.
Aaron: Since I consider Iraq and the overall war on terror to be the single most important issue of our time, I refuse to support any candidate who calls for American surrender in Iraq or any other front of the war on terror. If a candidate isn’t right on that issue, he or she will never have my support or vote unless the other candidate is so left-wing that I have to choose the lesser of two evils.
Second, any freedoms being lost are due to the totalitarian mindset currently held by the American left wing. These are the folks who want a nanny government to tell us how to live our lives, what to eat, what-when-where to smoke, and where/how to obtain our health care. They do this in the name of compassion, yet their underlying motive is their own power. Trust me, these people are NOT part of the Bush Administration and oppose the Patriot Act just like Ron Paul.
The Patriot Act in no way infringes on any American’s constitutional rights. It simply allows our government to monitor the activities of suspected terrorists & those who support them. Frankly, I’m not the slightest bit concerned about their rights, (as if they have any). Why are you??
Hi, couple things. First, Ron Paul is already polling above 2%. He’s at 8% in New Hampshire (fourth) and 7% in Nevada (third), and that is with only two or three weeks of advertising! Over the next few weeks HE WILL BREAK DOUBLE DIGITS in both places.
The only thing holding him back right now is low name recognition - blame the media for that. The message is what is actually propelling him as 70% of Americans now want us out of Iraq.
Let’s see Ron Paul is Pro-Life, Pro-2nd Amendment, Pro-Lower-Taxes, Anti-Government-Spending (this includes the needless war), and pro-individual-liberties. He also voted against the patriot act. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater would endorse Ron Paul. In fact, Barry Goldwater Jr. already has!
This quarter Ron Paul will be first in GOP fundraising as he should come in at $16+ million. This amount will surpass Giuliani’s and Romney’s numbers.
Actually, Romney hasn’t raised much outside of the $17 million loans he’s given himself. Giuliani is a Pro-Choice gun-snatcher. What’s Republican about that?
I feel real concerned that Vic Sprouse is even a Senator. Does he truly believe that there is a majority of people who still believe in the War in Iraq? And, it is very disturbing to me that he still calls it “cut and run” if someone stands up and presents real logic to our Middle East fallacies like Ron Paul has.
I will be so bold to declare this: If anyone other than Ron Paul gets the nomination, the Republican Party will go down next election. Why? Because people are sick of the war and what impact it’s having on our economy!
Surrender in Iraq? surrender from what? we have never declared war. There is no goal, and there was no clear objective to achieve victory. How can we win and how can we surrender.
Ron Paul just wants to stop taxing people here and spending it over there. Makes sense to me. If anyone thinks we are going to change the middle east I have a oceanfront property for sale in Iowa.
Olfrt,
Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist, if you belive that he is, you have just not done your research. I urge people to do their own research instead of listening to what the paid media forces you to believe as truth. You think Rupert Murdoch and his bought and paid for Hillary campaign is telling you the truth?
I dont care which candidate you do support, just be sure to get your information from somewhere other than Fox, CNN, MSNBC, or any of those incredibly biased sources.
Olfrt,
Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist, if you belive that he is, you have just not done your research. I urge people to do their own research instead of listening to what the paid media forces you to believe as truth. You think Rupert Murdoch and his bought and paid for Hillary campaign is telling you the truth?
Please see his detailed explanation here on his real policy, not what the media makes up and puts into a 5 second sound byte:
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst121806.htm
I dont care which candidate you do support, just be sure to get your information from somewhere other than Fox, CNN, MSNBC, or any of those incredibly biased sources.
Like many Republicans, I believe the U.S. government intervenes too much both within the U.S. and internationally and — like Ron — want to scale back the size and scope of the government substantially. I also cheer Ron’s genuine respect for the spirit and letter of the Constitution, and his emphasis on national defense as opposed to global micromanagement. He is the only candidate who is making the case for these things and hence I support him. Sadly, I view all the other GOP candidates as heading in the wrong (that is, current) direction of greater government intervention.
I have never seen so much positive and youthful energy at rallies for any other candidate, ever. This bodes well for our party, which is attracting many new members due to Ron’s efforts.
“Ron Paul and all with simular isolationist views are simply wrong.”
Anyone who gives George Bush credit for making America “safer” from terrorism is simply wrong.
Borders are still wide open even though one of the scare tactics the Republicans like to use is the possibility of a dirty bomb making its way into the US and being detonated in a major city.
Our ports are still unsecure as only about 5% of all cargo shipped into the US is inspected, even though the most likely means of delivering a large scale weapon of mass destruction is simply by hiding it in a shipping container bound for the USA.
Our invasions of 2 middle Eastern countries has caused the USA to be more hated by the muslim world, even though their hatred beforehand was enough for them to plot and execute the attacks of 9/11. And no amount of military effort is going to stop them from trying again.
And let’s not forget that most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, that 70% of the insurgents in Iraq are Saudis, an another 15% are Syrian. That leaves at best 15% of those fighting our troops in Iraq as Iranians, yet they are the ones who we are posturing against. Why? Because they don’t yet have a weapon capable of large scale destruction, so the time is right for America to pounce on them. Because if we wait until they have a nuke before we try to impose our beliefs on them, and try to reshape Iran in our favor, the damage will be much greater. And forget about the fact that Israel has the nuclear power to blow Iran off the map RIGHT NOW! The threat of Iran using a nuke against Israel is ludicrous! If they did, Israel would do exactly what the US government is claming that Iran wants to do with Iasrael… Blow them completely off the map. Not for nothing, but the President of Iran isn’t “insane”, but it’s so much easier to convince the sheep in America that this is the case so that we come off as justified in what the Bush administration is surely planning to do.
Olfrt, the fact that you were foreign born certainly doens’t make you an expert of the foreign policy of the USA. We can defend our borders completely, which would prevent any further attacks on US soil. this is not “isolationism”. That is cutting yourself completely off from the rest of the world. no diplomacy, trade, travel, etc. If you truly believe this is what Ron Paul wants, then you too have not done your homkework and sompletely swallow what the Republican talking heads are telling you. DO YOUR FREAKIN’ HOMEWORK, all of you! Stop listening to the pundits. Have none of you learned yet that the media lies? That they distort the truth to their favor? And that both of the major political parties in America do not care about you or the average citizen? They care about the wealthy elite of our society. Watch C-Span for a week, and just look at the decisions they make and tell me I’m wrong. For crying out loud, what’s it going to take for you all to think for yourselves? You certainly aren’t doing it when it comes to Ron Paul, because you’ve consistently mistated his positions, his ideas, and his intentions.
I have no problem with someone having a different ideology than Ron Paul, but for god’s sake, know what the hell you’re talking about before you spout off these lies about him.
BK,
You must not have listened to Judge Napolitano last night on Fox News. The Bush Admin’s PATRIOT Act is a slap in the face to our beloved Constitution. Listen:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017200.html
B.K.,
You also refuse to acknowledge the ROOT cause of the terrorism against us. If as you say “the overall war on terror to be the single most important issue of our time” why are you here spreading your misinformation.? Should’nt you be on the phone with a recruiter?
Mark Twain once wrote, “Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” After reading this tripe, I fully understand what he meant.
Further examination of your blog and your website clarified things somewhat. Anyone who can espouse Rudolph Giuliani as President of the United States will find little to dislike in another Clinton co-presidency. There is little substantive difference between the two. In fact, you might say that Giuliani is a composite of the two Clintons - he has Bill’s morals and Hillary’s ruthless ambition.
As I looked at your biography, another thing I noticed is that like the vast majority of those who favor sending American young people off to hopeless, third world cesspools, neither you nor your children are the ones going. Typical. I guess your family has “other priorities.”
“is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.”
Ron Paul is polling at 6% in the most recent national polls.
In NV, NH, and SC–he’s polling 8%
In Iowa–6%.
Olfrt says, “Today there is a group that would destroy that freedom for there fanatical beliefs.”
Unfortunately, Olfrt seems to be blind to the fact that the “group” that is hell-bent on destroying freedom in America is the American government. Both Republicans and Democrats in our GIGANTIC Federal government have done away with habeas corpus, allowed warrantless spying on Americans, and is defining it’s powers to control Americans in ways that are antithetical to our founders’ vision of liberty. James Madison said that continuous war was the surest way for citizens of a country to lose their liberty. No band of terrorists could ever destroy America - only WE can do that. A study of the histories of empires suggests that we are doing exactly that.
The biggest threat to your liberty is not al-Qaeda, it’s the U.S. Federal Government. Wake up.
(Oh, BTW, when you see Republicans championing the Dept. of Education, you know the party is toast.)
It is thinking like this, Mr Sprouse, that is driving people away from the Republican party. Most Ron Paul supporters I have met are intelligent, TRUE REPUBLICANS that are sick and tired of the constant fear-mongering, nanny-state approach to government. The only well-informed, intelligent candidate is Ron Paul. He, unlike yourself, understands that the primary function of government is to address the needs of OUR country and NOT to intervene in the affairs of others. Candidates like Rudy Guiliani, who are NOT TRUE REPUBLICANS are the ones doing damage to this party. I sincerely hope you research Dr. Paul’s positions further and educate yourself greater on foreign policy (and history) before writing such outrageous nonsense.
Ron Paul may or may not win the GOP nomination.
But if he goes down, he’ll go down swinging.
Olfrt:
Confronting and defeating the people you describe is a worthy goal. Do you really believe that the entire nation of Iraq is composed of these people? Why does confronting the criminals you speak of require occupying another nation?
If you really believe that all Iraqis are evil and deserve to be killed or subjugated, then say it. If you do though, let’s stop talking about the evils of Islamic jihad and their desire to subject the world to Islam. I for one, choose to believe (and have been persuaded when I have come across people from the Middle East) that there are good and bad people there.
Targeting entire nations is only likely to make good people who would otherwise have minded their own business hate us. Using the heavy handed tactics of occupation, we will only eliminate all terrorists if we are willing to eliminate an entire population of people - including those who are not yet terrorists but who will become terrorists because they are angry at our actions. Again, if you’re willing to admit that this is your aim, we can stop talking about how evil the Islamic radicals are.
Now, if we want to talk about capturing bin Laden and the other criminals purportively involved in killing some 3,000 people on 9/11, then we can get somewhere.
As more and more big government, pro-war, anti-civil liberties, “conservatives” line up to pout about Dr. Paul’s success, my optimism continues to grow.
Face the facts, we won the Iraq war the minute Saddam’s neck snapped, our continued presence there is because the EU sold us on their “you broke it you own it” nonsense. We fund Europe’s socilism through our defense department all the while they thumb their noses at us and the liberals of this country point them out as a model for our own government. It’s time they defended themselves.
The last republican to attract this many new voters to the GOP was Reagan. So now that Reagan has passed, you pine for Reagan and ridicule his heir.
This is the perfect example of why you will fail. Your base isn’t energized. You’ve propped up a pro-abortion, pro-gun control, pro-police state “Republican” as the front runner.
There was a time when all conservatives would be united against Guiliani as the incompetent nitwit that he is, but the former glory of the grand ole party has passed.
This is our time. Your “allies” can’t be bothered to leave home and vote for a guy that they know is hellbound and power hungry.
Want to know the difference between Hillary and Guiliani?… Their dress size.
You are blinded by romantic fantasies of conquest and empire. That is not the destiny of this nation. We are a nation of peace and commerce.
So while you grunt and grumble from the safety of your home, we will own the streets with our message. We will mobilize as much as the population as we possibly can, and we will win.
The beauty is, all of the fake conservatives, that drone on about Reagan’s legacy and small government values will see it happen in their times, and we can shake all of the imposters out of the GOP.
I look forward to this day, and to the victory of traditional conservative values. I have never left the GOP, but it has tried to leave me. Now we take it back.
It’s one thing to disagree with Ron Paul, but let’s at least not misrepresent his platform.
He doesn’t want to LEGALIZE drugs, he just believes, as is stated in the Constitution, that the FEDERAL government has no power to regulate them and it should be left up to the states.
But if Dr. Paul DID manage to legalize drugs, it does not mean YOU would be subsidizing it. Much more likely, it would be a huge tax revenue stream just like tobacco and alcohol. Combine that with the billions we now spend catching, prosecuting, and jailing casual users, and we begin to see that, whatever your MORAL stance on personal adult use of drugs, the FINANCIAL boon would be substantial, and most of that money would be taken directly from the thugs and criminals who currently control the drug markets.
I read all of your comments and quite frankly, you all are arguing over something we cannot control anyway. The computerized voting machines are a huge problem. Maybe you all should be concerned about that. With out a paper trail, you vote is meaningless. No Matter who you support!!!! The institution we so believe has wronged us and has taken away many of our civil liberties. I thank Ron Paul for being who he is and not a two faced politician. He has started a movement within the young people of this country. The young that will one day run this country. And for those pro war people in here I have this question: How come you aren’t over there? Bombs do not bring peace……
I find it sad that you are resorting to this type of attack. Also, I find it just as unfortunate that you are not a supporter of free speech, considering my previous comments did not get posted.
B.K.:
Talking about surrendering in Iraq is pure BS. We’re only surrendering if we believe the fight was worth it. What Ron Paul and his supporters are claiming is that the fight was never just. Few people still believe the claims that brought us into Iraq (that Saddam had WMDs). New justifications for being there have been invented. We simply don’t buy them.
Regarding Constitutional rights, isn’t it nice to know that the federal government can determine just who deserves those rights and who doesn’t? I mean, they’ll find out first whether you’re a terrorist and only then deprive you of your rights.
We’re not advocating rights for properly convicted criminals. We are advocating rights for people who have been accused of being criminals who may in fact be innocent. The justice system of granting rights to accused people has centuries of good experience. We’re not buying that Bush’s administration has a better way. Furthermore, we don’t believe that such measures will really do more to keep us safe.
@ B.K.
Well, you’re right about one thing. The left does want a nanny state, it does want to tell you how and what and when to eat sleep and drink.
G.W. has extended the power of the executive in some pretty extreme ways, at some point in the future, a leftist WILL get their hands on the reins.
The patriot act suspends habeus corpus. That means you can be arrested and tried by a secret tribunal, without being granted an attorney, because you are a “terrorist”
What’s the legal definition of being a “terrorist”?… The state just proclaims you one. Do you really trust Hillary or the next leftist shill to gain office with that power? I know that i don’t.
We are by far the most powerful nation in all of history, we don’t need the equivalent of the WW2 internment camps to beat a few fundamentalists hiding in caves. The very idea concept ignorant.
As for “surrendering” in Iraq, we won that war a long time ago. In case you haven’t been following, Saddam, and his two sons are long dead. Now were being run by the UN and the EU’s “you break it you own it” policy.
If Iraq is going to have a civil war then our presence is only delaying the inevitable. Don’t be a sucker for the socialist policies of the UN.
We prop up the EU by a third of our defense budget, so that they can enact socialist policies and embolden our home grown socialists.
Aren’t you tired of the american left pointing to Europe as an example for us? What makes that possible? The billions of dollars we give them in aid and defense.
I say its time the take care of their own houses, and are forced to pass responsible government. This will never happen so long as we are covering their butts.
So harp on all you like about your conservative ideals, I for one would like to do more than talk about them, I want to see them implemented.
This is to Olfrt.
Hereis the same propaganda that was being spouted off during ww2 when people fearded Hitler was going to take over the world….ok now laugh. the fool couldn’t even cross the English Channel let alone take over the world. fast forward to today and we hear the same crap. The islamofascists are taking over the world we have to stop them. Let me just say that this is the real paranoia in this country today. Most arab nations combined have the GDP of Spain….do you here the fear in my writing yet. We need to leave these people alone to find their own way. And if the way they find is attacking our country then we bomb them into the stone age and leave. I am pretty sure they will never do that again even if they could.
I am a SGT in the army and this is where it becom es near and dear. I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foregin and domestic and here’s the funny thing…I actually read it. So I will support a candidate for president who will support the constituiton to the letter not someone who will continue a fight that is unconstitutional and immoral. And by the way I have more fear of the man with 3000 nukes at his disposal than the man who is trying to build one. And by the way some of you need to study what libertarianism is before you knock it. Study the declaration of independence and you will see it is a libertarian document and that most of the founders were of a libertarian philosophy. Ron paul 2008.
I read the Senators commentary regarding Ron Paul and Iraq and there is one thing which everyone keeps repeating in comments that is making me crazy and that is the US “surrending” in Iraq. Just who would we be surrending to, the Iraqi people? We invaded their country to free them, so who are we fighting. Just how many foreigners are in Iraq or do the people of Iraq just want us out. It’s food for thought.
Only Rudy is willing to tell the truth about Ron Paul and his crazy plans:
http://www.rudygiulianiforum.com/
Sir,
You inspire me. If you can be a state senator so can I. I left WV 20 years ago. I only return to see family every three years. The policies set forth by WV politicians have crippled the state. You probably do not like RP because he would return power to the states. The last time I looked WV recieved more federal dollars than it paid. If states had to fund education, transportation, welfare, and so on and so on, what would WV look like? Kind of scary isn’t it? Reminds me of a child who has been cared for 30 years being told to get out of the house. The state I live in has thousands of former people from WV. Vic your thoughts on RP do not bother me. I have read worse. 20 years ago I chose freedom. I chose free market labor where my skills keep me employed. I chose private education over the public indoctrination. You talk about change. Is it lip service? I hope not. Oh! by the way. We are not surrendering. War was never declared.
16 by Olfrt: September 11, 2001 the beggining of the First War War.
Well, not exactly. You see, once upon a time there was this great libertarian fellow TJ who was opposed by mercantilist AH whose follower HC gave way to AL’s despotic rule. Out of this lot came empire via -the Maine- Mahan’s 1898 navy using Spain’s obsolete fleet for target practice here and there while aided at home by early jingoistic mob arousing yellow press labelling TR -the only sane, non-interventionist man in the House- isolationist.
By 1913 NWO was more than alive and well -IRS+FRB-so WW compounded both foolish actions with getting in and extending the duration of WW1.
One would have thought Babara Tuchman’s The Proud Tower to be a sufficiently well known eye opener, though it seems some may need to start from the very beggining with all four volumes of Murray Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty.
B.K., are you joking? Secret wiretaps, secret warrants and secret searches are not a violation of the 4th Amendment? A felony for mentioning that you were the target of a secret warrant doesn’t violate the 1st Amendment?
These claims just demonstrate your reprehensible attitude towards the Constitution.
Delete my comments…. Horrible
BOMBS DO NOT BRING PEACE
“Actually, he won’t garner more than 10% ever in any poll that is ever run and actually will most likely remain right where he belongs… among the 2% of contrarian Republicans who are against Bush and Iraq.”
This is an appallingly boneheaded statement, considering that Dr. Paul is now polling at 8% in New Hamsphire and continues to gain momentum. It’s even more ridiculous if one counts straw polls, as Paul has won a large number of those across the country, according to his campaign website.
keep deleting the comments I leave. You all are screwed in head.
Republican warmongers will get nowhere in the long run. It is complete antithesis of the Federalist Papers and writings of the Founders on war from those such as Madison and Jefferson.
Senator, you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone, ’cause the times they are a-changin’.
B.K., you definitely need to go back and read the Constitution. There is no provision in the Bill Of Rights for self-written warrants which show no probable cause. No provision for making it a FEDERAL CRIME for an American, after receiving one of these warrants, to speak about it to his spouse, clergyman, or attorney. If this is your vision of America, that’s fine. You should work diligently to amend the Constitution and eliminate the 1st and 4th Amendments. Until that happens, the Patriot Act is, by definition, null and void under current U.S. law.
The part about the “American surrender” in Iraq was pretty funny, too. “Mission Accomplished”, remember? We can go home now. Look what happened in Basra after the Brits left - violence is down 90%. Seems they get along okay when there’s no invading army around.
But don’t worry - the war will end soon no matter who gets elected or how we feel about it. I hear the Chinese are getting very tired of financing it, and getting nothing but trash paper in return.
I think you’re out of touch with the Republican party, all things considered… How do you explain that in Iowa, a full 54% of Republican caucus goers say that they want out of Iraq within six months? And this is even after reports of success in Iraq:
http://cmondisplay.com/2007/10/21/majority-of-iowa-republican-caucus-goers-favor-iraq-withdrawal-within-6-months/
I think that the Republican party has it’s head in the sand about what the strength Paul is showing actually signifies. If Republicans push paul out of the camp, he takes the “big tent” with him. He’s exactly the kind of candidate who could give the libertarian party the boost that they’ve been looking for. His candidacy is a lot of young folks in the 18-45 range. If he were to take a significant percentage of those folks, the Republicans might have the votes to win another presidency for more than a decade.
Hear me now and believe me later: the Republican Party is on the ropes. A pro-war candidate isn’t going to turn out the vote unless there is another attack on America.
Seems the senator is a bit thin-skinned. My polite rebuttal seems to have been censored. Sadly, I didn’t save it. So to briefly go over points I made:
First, Dr. Paul’s fundraising is out-pacing all the “second tier” candidates combined. He keeps up with McCain and Romney sans his personal loans to his campaign. He’s raised nearly $12 million this quarter and will likely break $16 million by December 31. It’s a joke to put him in the same group as Lyndon LaRouche.
Second, his “surrender” in Iraq. Bush announced “mission accomplished” over 3 years ago. How is it surrender then? Either way, Iraq didn’t attack us on 9.11, to think we should be hunting down Osama.
Third, Dr. Paul is no media darling, despite your coinage. He ignored at best, ridiculed at worst. What other candidate gets the constant editorialized news articles? “Ron Paul, who can’t win his party’s nomination…”
Forth, Dr. Paul is 4th in NH, and 5th in Nevada. He’s grown from 0-1% in polls to 5-8%. He’s still the least known candidate, expect those numbers to grow.
The biggest threat to the U.S. is the current attack on the integrity of the U.S. Dollar. It is a fact that there would be no occupation in Iraq or Afghanistan but for the Bank of Japan and China loaning us money. China could wreck our economy tomorrow, if it wanted to. But neo-cons don’t want us to look at the real threat.
People who are afraid of fanatics in the middle east simply are scaredy-cats. Not only are they adverse to serving in the military, but they must stay awake at night thinking Ripley and Cross Lanes will be destroyed by Arabic-screaming bandits in the night.
In the last 10 years, there has been more domestic terrorism in the U.S. (Tim McVeigh and the D.C. Sniper) than there have been Islamic terrorism. Thank goodness McVeigh and the DC Sniper were U.S. military veterans instead of Canadian mounties; the neo-cons would have invaded Canada before Iraq.
B.K.–Aaron is right; you are exactly in line with Ron Paul on all the issues except for Iraq. However, you are on the same side as Hillary Clinton (and Rudy Giuliani) when it comes for our foreign policy. Shouldn’t that make you think again? At least, listen to Ron Paul when he discusses how our dollar is being debased by our politicians who can’t help spending but don’t raise taxes. Inflation, indeed, is a stealth tax created by the federal government bureaucrats.
BK,
I find there is a flaw in your logic. You said that suspected terrorists and those who support them have no rights. That is an absolutely astounding statement and unfortunately seemingly typical among the Republican Party. No doubt there are many who will call me a terrorist sympathizer. Here is my position. The Founding Fathers, as a founding principle of our nation, in the Declaration of Independence said that men are endowed by their creator with inalienable rights. All men, not just American citizens, are endowed with thse rights. As I see it, our bill of rights is meant to protect a few of those rights from being usurped by a tyrannical government. The Bill of Rights protects our natural rights, the rights all men have. So to say that terrorists suspects are not entitled to those rights as we are seems to imply the non-universiality of natural rights. In essence, to reduce my argument down, you imply, knowingly or not, that our rights are granted by our government rather than government being implemented to protect our natural rights. If our rights are natural, they are universal. If they are government granted, then they only apply to Americans and terrorist suspects therefore have no rights. If our rights, as you imply, are non-universal, then there really is nothing wrong with our government taking away the rights of American citizens because our rights derived from the government in the first place. It really comes down to what you believe at heart. Are our rights natural, endowed by our creator, inalienable for all men, or are they granted by governments to men.
Olfrt:
The beginning of the First World War was in August of 1914.
Also, if you have a problem with a humble, non-interventionist foreign policy, you also might have a problem with the U.S. Constitution. Better off ignoring it, like the Clinton and Bush administrations, or else it might keep you up at night, too.
If Ron Paul is irrelevant, why aren’t you blogging about something that might be relevant, then?
Ron Paul doesn’t support nation-building or interventionism; you’re either incapable of logically addressing those concepts, or purposefully choose not to, so you incorrectly label them as “surrender.”
Gee, my eyes have been opened.
“Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.”
It’s either them or us.
America IS imploding… thanks to all the imperial warmongering and the inflationary central bank. Check the value of the dollar… Check the debt… The dollar is plummeting, debt is skyrocketing… and there is no end in sight to the orgy of war and spending going on. And NO Republican candidate (other than Paul) is proposing to do anything to change direction.
So…we can save Iraq… But we’ll destroy America in the process.
If you want to eliminate radical islamic terrorsit, your strategy is falwed because the current regime in this coutnry enriches despotic regimes in Pakistan and Saudi Ar5abia and Eygpt that are breeding grounds for islamic radical of the worst sort…these are the biggest recipients of oru foreign aid and we also borrow hundreds of billions from these oil producing nations….if we are in danger of islamic radical here tehn teh despotic regimes over tehre are in EVEN greater danger and that means our financial system that is dependent on the islamic oil producing nations lending us money and holding dollar denominated bonds is a grave danger…so your not being logical if you think these wars are making us safer….
B.K.,
Your lack of concern for the rights of SUSPECTED terrorists (not the same as actual terrorists) shows just how much trust you place in the government. This is hardly a conservative disposition.
Are you familiar with the 4th Amendment to the Constitution — you know, that document conservatives sometimes pretend to respect? What about the 1st Amendment? The Patriot Act violates both. That is not to mention its orwellian title, which seems tailor made for buffoons who confuse words for reality (i.e. the average Hannity/Limbaugh listener).
For all your railing against the “left wing,” maybe it’s time to look in the mirror. Your godhead, Bush, and his Republican congress implemented the largest expansion of the welfare state since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. Even discounting so-called “defense” spending, they have outspent the Clinton administration. Their gun-grabbing, wasteful, big-government response to Hurricane Katrina would have done Mao proud. Then there’s No Child Left Behind. I could go on and on.
If Hillary was running with an R next to her name, you’d be promoting her “conservative credentials” right now, just as so many Republicans are fawning over the cross-dressing leftist Giuliani.
Look at yourselves, you communist Republicans — directed by labels instead of ideas! If you nominate anyone but Ron Paul, I look forward to your well-deserved defeat in 2008.
Quoting B.K. - “The solution is to nominate a candidate who will make every effort to bring domestic spending under control, keep taxes low, initiate tax reform and elimination, fight to win the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and anywhere else we have to fight them, and stop the flow of illegal immigrants across our borders. We also should nominate a candidate who has the courage to reform Social Security before it goes totally broke when the baby-boomers retire and who will reform the health care industry by enacting free-market, capitalist ideas. We need a candidate who has the guts to enact tough spending cuts in sacred cow programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and education. We need a candidate who will nominate Constitutionalist judges, who understands that Roe v. Wade is bad law, and that the decision to restrict, ban, or keep the procedure should be made by each state.
I’m sorry, but Ron Paul does not meet these requirements.”
Actually, you just quoted Ron Paul’s platform verbatim, with the exception of the “war on terror”. Now if you can tell me that I should somehow feel safer with our troops spread out all over the globe (THE LARGEST AND STRONGEST MILITARY EVER ASSEMBLED BTW; LARGER THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD’S COMBINED) trying to tell the rest of the world how to run their own affairs by aiming guns and bombs at them, rather than being stationed right here inside our borders protecting what we have fought and worked so hard for these 200 years, then you have sold your own liberty for a false sense of “security”…
…next comes the erosion of our Second Amendment rights as is already underway in Boston and Washington DC. Did it ever occur to you that 9/11 could have been avoided by simply allowing commercial pilots to defend themselves while on the job?…
…and don’t even get me started on the Federal Reserve system that funds this madness and will soon drag you into a pit of financial ruin that will make the 1930’s look like Nirvana…
Please take a good, long, clear look at history… it will paint a very clear picture of where we’re heading if Dr. Paul’s ideas do not take root in our society.
I thought this was a joke at first. Even a backwater WV “senator” would not be so out of touch with reality. It is NOT a joke. God help us with lunatics like the good “senator” on the loose. The only response is to ignore the ignorant. Senator, where did you study the United States Constitution?
http://www.ronpaul2008.com
B.K.
Even FoxNews calls the Patriot Act unconstitutional!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvu12z832Xc
[click above on invisible link]
I know, I know, they are wrong, too!
Todd Gunter:
Have you even read the platform of the Republican Party? At least the pro-life, limited government Party I am aware of, in MN and nationally… Congressman Paul fits those limits better than any other candidate. Consider former Senator Thompson’s position of McCain-Feingold…he voted for it and was instrumental in getting it passed… sounds like a strict constructionist to me, someone who really understands the constitution and free-speech. Where does the platform say there is a hierarchy of positions? Congressman Paul is more conservative and consistent than any other candidate, and only disagrees with them substantively on one, Iraq. It just so happens that a massive majority of the American people agree with him on that one… it was a mistake to go in, and bad prescriptions need changing.
Please don’t equate Ron Paul with representing the libertarian view. He’s more of a leftwing populist. We libertarians, particularly us libertarian Republicans are strong on defense, support the War on Islamo-Fascism, and thoroughly reject Ron Paul’s isolationist, surrender-tarian views.
He’s good on economics. Great on taxes. But on foreign policy, Ron Paul is a losertarian, NOT a libertarian.
John A., I would have to say you are correct in everything you are saying. What logic is there in giving up our freedoms in order to protect them from terrorists? Some people can never be convinced, even with plummeting dollar (its kind of hard to refute that). My advice would be to concentrate on people who are a little more even minded, and convince them of the fact that, as a republic, we are facing the single greatest threat in our history. If the economy collapses, and if we don’t elect RP, our chances are very, very slim that we will not be living in a global government. This could be then end of our personal liberties. economic turmoil = political turmoil. These people need to wake up and realize that everyone except for RP is a GLOBALIST. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU OR YOUR FAMILY. Frankly, some terrorist in a cave doesn’t give me the chills, it is the internationalists and servants of the banking elites who have hijacked our country!
Just wanted to make a quick note that leaving Iraq is not surrender. Surrender happens when one country is defeated in war and offers concessions to another as the price of ending a war, not what happens when one country bombs another, overthrows its government, replaces it with another government, puts its soldiers all over the other country and then decides that it doesn’t make sense to stay any longer so leaves. Calling that surrender is mildly absurd.
Unless I misunderstood what I have read, Ron Paul’s foreign policy has almost nothing to do with Iraq. He advocates non-interventionism with respect to military adventures and officious intermeddling in the political affairs of foreign nations. This blanket policy would lead to fixing the mistake of prior administrations’ intermeddling and military adventurism.
Again, as I understand it, Ron Paul is committed to defending the US from any imminent foreign attack, and rightly views the unwarranted, illegal and unconstitutional use of American military forces abroad as a threat to American security.
With respect to the Patriot Act, I respectfully suggest that proponents of that law take the truly radical step and do something the Congress never bothered to do: actually read the law before they decide to support it. Better yet, just read Judge Napolitano’s most recent book (the Sheeple Book) for an honest, scholarly and complete appraisal of the rights-violating and un-American aspects of that Act. Basically, the Act reads the key right-protecting components of the 4th Amendment out of existence . . . for EVERYONE. Even those in Congress who supoort the Act recognize this, but support it out of an abundance of caution for “security”.
Basic political rights inure to everyone and can only be forfeited after the application of due process of law. You can look it up, if you dare.
Until WWI, these United States stayed out of entangling alliances abroad, although we involved ourselves abroad in the Spanish American War, a war and the aquisitions through which we should have avoided. Since then, various administrations of the general government, against the advice of the Founders and against the inclinations of the American people, have chosen to involve us in one misadventure after another, beginning with Wilson’s “making the world safe for democracy.” These involvements have depleated our wealth, taken the lives and maimed the bodies and souls of countless young Americans, diminished our liberty at home, and unleashed dark forces - fascism and communisim after WWI and communism after WWII. Our involvement in the Middle East since the end of WWII has spawned new enemies, has continued to bleed our youth, has depleated our treasury and has reduce our moral capacity as a nation.
Ron Paul calls us back to the admonitions of the Founders; he calls us back to our roots as a peaceful Republic and reject the warmongering empire. He heralds the message of liberty.
He may, in the end, be disregarded by most Americans; but his message is a true today as when it was delivered by Washington and Jefferson over two hundred years ago.
“Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.”
…aaaah, “allowing that country to implode” I don’t know if you have recognized but that country has been pretty much destroyed by our initial invasion and subsequent occupation.
People say that Ron Paul’s foreign policies would be a disaster…I suppose that those who say such things view our current policies as a success, for that matter they must view the policies of the last 50 years or so as a success also. The interventionist policies of this nation has not only been a disaster for decades, but a dangerous one that has costs this country in unimaginable ways.
We have meddled in the financial and political affairs of other nations, overthrown elected governments, installed oppressive right-wing dictators, subverted entire economies, and produced all manner of ill-will around the world because some idiots in Washington had a grand idea. We have allowed ourselves to be ruled by fear, irrational decisions, and just stupid policies over the years.
Our interventions in both Afghanistan and Iraq will ultimately prove to be failures because we, in our self-righteousness, think we know better and that we can project our Western ideals on a foreign people that not only view those ideals as alien, but as an affront to their own moral understandings. In Afghanistan we have installed a government that is primarily lead by Pashtuns, one of the most widely hated tribes in the region and yet we put all our political marbles in that group without consideration of the consequences. The same is true in Iraq, we didn’t consider the consequences of entering that country.
One day, and it will not be long, we will learn that it is far better to keep our noses out of the majority of problems around the world, most of the time we only make things worse. If a policy is not totally in the absolute best interest of the American People then we should not implement such a policy.
There is a failure of understanding this enemy, understanding his reasonings, his motivations. There are several informative books, difficult to get, but well worth the hunt if you are lucky to find them. One was written by Abdallah Azzam, founder of Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK-which would come to be known as al Qaeda), the book is indispensable in understanding this enemy: “The Main Obligation of Muslims is to Defend the Land of Islam”. Osama bin Laden was extremely influenced by Azzam and his book, however, it appears that it has rarely been read by many Westerners, especially those who are attempting to wage this “war on terror”. If they had read it then they would know several things about this enemy, the first is that “he” is driven by a devout, one could say fanatical connection with Islamic territory and Islamic “holy places”. The second is that they view many of the current regimes in the region as de facto supporters of U.S. policies in the region because they have allowed the U.S. to establish bases on what they consider holy ground.
Of course, it did not help the entire situation that the U.S. government allowed over 30 MAK branches to operate under their noses for years, collecting millions of dollars in donations from the American Muslim community during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Now, if we actually look at a time-line of when the ultra-radicalization and indeed the beginning of attacks against U.S. targets, we will find that there is a very direct correlation between our introduction of troops stationed in and around the Arabian peninsula and those attacks. Yes, there were sporadic attacks prior to this period, but primarily by those who had Palestinian connections. If you recall, the majority of the Arab world was pleased that we intervened in the case of Kuwait however, it was that intervention that opened the door for the U.S. to pursue a very different policy in the region. That policy, perhaps all along, was to establish a strong presence in the region and in Central Asia. Whatever the reasons behind the implementation of that policy it consolidated several factions of Islamic fundamentalists who had felt completely powerless against everyone from the Soviets in Afghanistan, to Israel, to the U.S., into a force with a common goal, a common focus and a common enemy. That enemy was none other then the most conspicuous threat to Islam that they saw: The United States of America.
The U.S. policy that engaged the establishment of those bases in the region not only provided a focal point for decades of rage, but it became the collective focus of Islamic hatred. While there was a definite push toward radicalization due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it was the establishment of U.S. military bases that actually provided the radicals with the impetus to form and execute their radical ideals in the region and then around the world. At one time, the Mujahidin movement was relatively restricted to Afghanistan, but soon, with the new focus of perceived U.S. aggression in the region, that movement spread to Bosnia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and now, thanks to our poorly executed invasion: Iraq. It continues to spread because the perceived threat remains.
Many seem to fail to understand that the core message of the Islamic extremists is that Islam is threatened by the presence and actions of the United States. It probably would surprise many, but according to several Intel reports, and reports from former al Qaeda members, new green recruits are not indoctrinated in the Koran, but their indoctrination involves what they call the Sixth Pillar of Islam, which states that when Islam is threatened and attacked that it is the moral obligation of all Muslims to rise to its defense. The destruction of al’Qaeda’s base of operation in Afghanistan and the fall of the Taliban only served to fan the flames of the extremist and expand their recruitment methods and reach. We would have done much better to have quietly and surgically taken bin Laden and his cohorts out then to have actually invaded. That would have cut off the head of the snake and then it would have been much easier to contain the radicalization of Islamist in the region.
Our current Islamophobia blinds us to a very important reality about why they despise the U.S. and why they will continue to attack us. One of the truly amazing things about our current “war on terror” and U.S. intervention is the fact that it is so unfocused and poorly executed. In particular our early actions in Afghanistan proved far less effective then our government publicized and propagandized to the American public.
Americans do not have the taste or the stomach for extended warfare, we never have. Nor do we tend to have the philosophical or political fortitude to engage an enemy, particularly this enemy, over an extremely prolonged period. On the other hand, the enemy we are now engaging is well aware of the requirements of patience and the advantages of playing their agenda over the long haul. Theirs is a philosophy that requires endurance in the face of their enemies and in their patience they strategize accordingly. We falsely assume, thanks to the Bush Administration’s insistence, that since this country has not been attacked since 9/11 that our government’s defense methods are working however, that assumption is based upon highly irrational assessments and miscalculations. Remember, this enemy is very, very patient and chooses his actions based upon a very determined course of action, not, as some portray, emotionalism.
While the Bush Administration made a point to publicize the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the routing of al Qaeda as a victory, the truth points to a far less decisive outcome. Long before the attacks of 9/11, al Qaeda proceeded to remove all but skeleton encampments from the region, by the time we attacked the country most of the Taliban and al Qaeda had disappeared into the Pashtun tribal areas of Pakistan and other Central Asian countries. We were told that bin Laden was surely in a tunnel in Tora Bora, unfortunately for the Administration, bin Ladin had, in my opinion, left Afghanistan long before the invasion, probably through Karachi and probably on a private jet belonging to one of the Royal Saudi princes.
The battles of Tora Bora and Shahi Kowt did nothing but allow the remaining skeleton encampments to slip over the border into Pakistan…our ally in this extremely poorly planned and executed “war on terror”. Such intervention obviously serves a political purpose because it is definitely not serving a military purpose. It is not producing the results that this government claims even though they are outspoken in those claims. In the end, we will see that the results in both Iraq and Afghanistan will not only fail to produce the stated results this government has espoused, but will fail to add any security to this nation and its people.
Our leadership in this country has one of the most myopic mentalities that I haven’t witnessed since the Johnson Administrations. It appears to be oblivious to the potential results of its actions, both here at home and abroad. Bush lead this country to war, both in Afghanistan and Iraq, based upon very dubious assumptions and it shows.
Our actions, based upon those dubious assumptions will eventually cause the complete failure of the Bush goals in both countries. That failure is already becoming very evident in Iraq and Afghanistan. We will, in the end, lose both efforts to the Bush/Cheney myopia. The Bush Administration either dismissed or failed to listen to experienced counsel on the possible effects of not only the invasions, but also occupations of those countries and there was plenty of experienced voices warning that there was a distinct probability of eventual failure. Our intelligence community had almost a decade of direct experience in Afghanistan from running one of the largest covert actions in our country’s history while combating the Soviets, yet the Bush Administration blatantly ignored those with that extensive experience. We are, in essence, making the same mistakes that the Soviets made in Afghanistan, and the same mistakes that the British made in Iraq. We have “installed” Westernized and backed governments in both countries and in a very real way we have attempted to install a Westernized culture on both countries in hopes that it would eventually pacify the Muslim populations. It is however, counterintuitive to attempt such actions without understanding the culture itself and this Administration simply continues on the same path that it ignorantly assumes will work.
Our leaders, who have both misjudged and miscalculated, not only our enemy, but also the effects of our policies around the world and especially in the Middle East and Central Asian countries.
Many see this “war” as a chess game, with strategic moves and counter-moves. The issue and the problem, for 109 years, has been that this country has played its foreign policy just like a chess game. Unfortunately, in a chess game there is a definite “known”, given moves and strategies designed specifically for those moves; that is not true in international relations or successful foreign policies intent on providing this country with adequate and appropriate security. This country has made what its “wise” leaders consider strategic moves, just like in chess, but those moves have been, for the most part, based upon isolated actions and reactions while not taking into account that such moves always have consequences that can potentially nullify the move or make the move lose its potential value or in a worse case scenario: cost far more than if the move had never been made in the first place.
This government has been involved in a type of piece-meal strategy based upon an almost purely military arrogance that has prevailed in this country for decades and that strategy is not only severely outdated, but stagnant, extremely conventional and based on assumptions that can no longer be relied upon. At one time our military might was enough to keep, at least in the strange mental world of our government leaders, the rest of the world “in line” with what they considered U.S. interests, but that is no longer the case. First, there is no real definition of our national interests, only a very indistinct and broad definition that inherently creates a large degree of obscuration. On top of all of that, there is a conglomeration of mismatched analysis combined with the pressure of political and special interests that has, particularly in the last 7 years, produced far less reliable information than is required. In many cases, the information has been either willfully ignored or dismissed without proper consideration by those who are the “decision makers” in this government.
This may sound odd, but in numerous cases this governments preconceptions have, because of certain internal ideologies, colored the policies and actions taken by this government without consideration of the consequences of those actions. In many ways, judged by the decisions of this government, it has deliberately shelved proper policy and action for that which they consider much more suitable for their ideological point of view. This has proved, time and again, disastrous and it is still going on in this government.
Ron Paul is not advocating a policy that ignores potential threats, but he has stated that it is time that this government put away the shortsighted policies that make this nation a target for any enemy or potential enemy. He has also advocated that this government take a far wiser approach to both foreign policy and our interventions, both covert and overt. He has advocated the necessity of understanding our enemies, their motives and therefore their potential actions based upon those motives. From my reading of Ron Paul, he takes a very sober viewpoint and advocates that this country do the same because if it ignores the provocation of its policies then it will continue to suffer the consequences of those provocations.
History is filled with polices that we now mimic and unfortunately, the outcome of those historic polices either proved to be militarily disastrous or financially disastrous or both. Most countries that pursued almost identical polices as we now pursue eventually collapsed from external conquest or internal economic and political collapse that lead to external conquest. If we are so arrogant to believe that we are different then the great empires, the great civilization of the past then we are in for a very rude and very hard reality.
Our leaders have poorly defined its foreign policy and haphazardly pursued a foreign policy that is not based upon actual defense of this country, but upon a view of broadly and extended interests. Until we limit our foreign policy and its actions to a purely defensive base then we can expect even more attacks, more threats and more terrorism.
It is interesting that we rarely hear that the Jihad proposed by bin Laden is considered defensive in nature, by the tenants of Islam. We have been induced into believing that they are just attacking us because of a non-descript reason relating to our way of life or our freedom, etc. That suggestion is not only based upon a politically induced and propagated fantasy by this Administration, but on the assumption that the American public will wholly accept and swallow such a ridiculous, and I might add, baseless proposition. Until we can face the reality behind the attacks and threats of this “war on terrorism”, then we will continue down the path that has brought more failures over the last 45 or 50 years than successes. It is time to defend, really defend this country for a change.
Ron Paul has not only been absolutely correct in his assessments about the foreign policy foibles of this government, but has predicted most of the resulting blowback of such policies over the years.
For the far from useful idiots who run this country it is time that all Americans woke up and realize that they are perfectly willing to shoot smoke up our collective asses as long as they can achieve their paticular agendas, which in most cases does not have the best interest of this nation at heart.
Ron Paul is a old fashion constitution loving republican and he is drawing more fresh blood to the republican party than ever before.
You should be exited that so many people want to be part of the party. War-mongering won’t win you new supporters and will not win this election.
Go Ron. You are winning and this article proves it.
B.K. writes: “Since I consider Iraq and the overall war on terror to be the single most important issue of our time, I refuse to support any candidate who calls for American surrender in Iraq or any other front of the war on terror.”
Iraq didn’t have anything to do with the “war on terror” until the United States invaded and reduced the place to chaos. Even Bush himself was forced to admit this in an off-guard moment:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/21/bush-on-911/
Later: “The Patriot Act in no way infringes on any American’s constitutional rights. It simply allows our government to monitor the activities of suspected terrorists & those who support them.”
Here’s the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
This means that the government is granted the power to e.g. tap phones only when there is evidence that an actual crime has been, or is about to be committed, and only to look for the specific things listed in the warrant.
Now our government was already wiretapping anybody they wanted anytime they wanted anyway. The only restriction was that they had to submit a warrant within thirty-six hours to inform a rubber-stamping judge that they had done so. The real reason they wanted to skip the warrant part was because they wanted to wiretap people without the need to tell anyone who it was they were actually wiretapping. This is of course because their real targets are political and corporate enemies (including any citizen that happens to object to government policy).
To claim that the Patriot Act “in no way infringes on any American’s Constitutional rights” is either profoundly naive or deliberate deception.
What you didn’t hear in the newspapers is that in August of 2000, Iraq switched from accepting dollars for their oil-for-food program to accepting euros. Switching back to dollars was the *first* thing the invading U.S. forces did when they rolled into Baghdad.
What you aren’t hearing in the newspapers is that Iran has just asked Japan to start paying for oil with yen instead of dollars, and they’ve spent years trying to establish a non-dollar-denominated oil bourse.
In other words, the invasion of Iraq and the current belligerence toward Iran are actually mainly about an increasingly desperate attempt to slow the dollar’s decay as a world-reserve currency. In other words, our soldiers are dying to preserve the money-printing capabilities of the super-rich.
Dr. Ron Paul is a direct threat to all of this, which is why the Republican establishment is even willing to go against their base and even loose to Hillary to prevent his candidacy from gaining traction.
B.K.
That mentality is what empowers governments. All BAD LAWS came from good intentions.
The patriot act is a powerful thing that WILL be corrupted in time and used against good people as it the power it gives to government grows.
The government in America is a sponge and is soaking up our rights for itself like water. It is swelling with danger.
You put more energy in supporting a fight for another nations freedom that will NEVER benefit us. You support PREEMPTIVE WAR like Hitler did.
If you were in Germany under Hilter you would’ve been a proud soldier fighting preemtive wars for Germany’s national security. I would’ve been shot at.
Hitler said, “if we don’t fight them there we will fight them here!”
You first concern needs to be America not Iraq. You need to put FIRST OUR freedom and liberty from internal oppression that you are so blind to.
Ah yes, the smear continues and here comes the COINTELPRO to agree with the smear, is if anyone cared or agreed.
The Ron Paul Revolution is centered around the concept of Liberty. It’s what the people want, and something long lost to the one-part system we have now that pretends to be two-party.
Liberty will be aquired, and maintained, as prescribed by the Founders. The means are peaceful. And serious.
But hey, the rest of the Republicans are entitled to think this is some fluke or the tables will turn. Hitler was the same way in his bunker even until the Russians were within a few city blocks.
ALSO B.K.
When you say we must eliminate all Terrorist from the face of the earth.
That’s how extremists talk. The one’s you accuse of saying that to us. In my mind you are of the same mold. Think about that.
You are saying that we are better than them and they say they are better than us. Both of you are fueling the fire of hate and racism. Both of you want to KILL.
THE ANSWER: Listen to the founding fathers warnings, put the constitution first, put OUR freedoms first in before other nations.
Thank you.
Where do people get the idea that Ron Paul wants to abolish Social Security? It is not part of his platform. He has publicly stated that people who have been forced to contribute to Social Security need to be payed and has voted or introduced legislation to that effect in the past. *Huckabee* is the only candidate that has stated he wants to get rid of Social Security. If you want to hate someone, do it for the right reason. Abolishing Social Security is an extremist libertarian platform. Ron Paul has never been an extremist libertarian. He supports some libertarian views, but they have been moderated by pragmatism. He has served and been consistently reelected as a *Republican* for decades.
He has not said he will abolish the IRS, at least during his term. Huckabee has (in favor of the “FairTax”). He wants serious reform. He wants to significantly cut spending (backed by his voting record) to make that reform easier. Spending is something other candidates have at best toyed with and it is *not* backed by their records.
Talk about the right candidate, please.
B.K.: You say that Republicans do not support PATRIOT. Why did they (along with the Democrats) overwhelmingly vote for it? Why did they vote for FISA changes and military commissions? You then say that there is nothing wrong with Patriot. Why then, do you say Republicans are against it?
The problem with PATRIOT, FISA changes, and the Military Commissions Act is not that they are used against terrorists, but that they are used against *accused* or *suspected* terrorists and people *accused* or *suspected* of helping them. You can donate to a charity which, unknown to you, has some suspicious connections and land in the soup. You can be friends with someone who goes nuts and blows something up and land in the soup. Even if this were not the case, even Adolf Hitler would deserve a fair trial (before he is hung).
I agree with those who are smart enough to point to our current and future debt as the issue that matters.
$50 trillion in entitlements and $9 trillion in current debt equals the end of America…period. For those who wish to argue this point, take it up with the Comptroller of the US David Walker, who has been trying to tell America the morbid truth.
I find it embarrassing to be an American when I hear this terrorism nonsense, and that’s exactly what it is…nonsense, by citizens who believe it’s AOK to borrow every red cent from Communist China to invade a 3rd world country under fraudulent pretenses.
Six years and a trillion or so dollars later, we have not captured or killed a single soul involved with the 9/11 attacks, and Zawahiri and Bin Laden are still free in the open arms of our expensive Pakistani Puppet Regime..
I wish Senator Sprouse would have paid half the attention to his personal life before pontificating anything regarding Congressman Paul, MD. But I guess his marital status explains his love for Rudy.
I want a President who is beyond reproach, has a proven record of principled actions, who understands monetary policy and who not only understands Mr. Walker’s dire warnings, but agrees with them, which narrows the field to one.
It’s a sad thing when Ron Paul (supposedly a Republican) and Dennis Kucinich (certifiably nutty) are indistinguishable. But that’s the way it is.
“…he is a media darling…”
What media do you watch???
The popularity Ron Paul has gained is because of his large grass roots following and in spite of the media which at first completely ignored him, and now continually labels him as kook, fringe, and dark horse.
When 38,000 people send him money in one day, you can’t very well argue that he doesn’t have a broad base of support and you shouldn’t be surprised if the media covers it.
What you are seeing is not an attempt to “Hijack” anything. It is democracy in action. You’re just not used to it.
His positions are popular with the majority of the American people and even with a majority of Republicans. Once upon a time the Republican Party stood for limited government, lower taxes, and personal liberty. Now it seems to be the “Tax and Borrow” party of Big Government and Big Brother. Ron Paul would fix that.
I’m not sure about West Virginia, but I’ve seen polls from Iowa that 54% of Repbulicans favor a complete withdrawal from Irag within 6 months.
Aaron and John A.-
What I find interesting is that you tell people to take a look at Ron Paul, that others agree with him if you set the War on Terror aside. The thing is, people don’t want to put the War on Terror aside. Personally, that is one of the top issues that I simply cannot compromise on. The fact still remains, there are extremists that want nothing more than to destroy us and we cannot ignore that fact. We cannot surrender, it is simply not an option.
We are loosing our Constitutional protected rights because of the leftist fight here to take away our freedoms.
Ron Paul simply does not have what it takes to continue the fight. The fight against terror and the fight to protect our freedoms here at home!
Do you so called conservative must think Robert Baer is some sort of kook?
How is it that big government ,fake conservatives such as yourselves can sit here and jsut assume that 20 year veterans of the CIA have no idea what they are talking about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDXurOmeJxc
Do you know what “Operation Northwoods” was?
Do you know that later Wolfowitz worked closely with the folks who thought Operation Northwoods was a good idea and tried to get JFK to approve it?
How does that make you feel about wolfowitz as a person or anyone who respects him and his opinions on foreign policy?
“I personally don’t mind a person exercising the freedom to ruin their health (assuming that they’re an adult), but I resent them wanting me to subsidize their habit. They have a well deserved reputation as a party of kooks.”
This is not true. Ron Paul certainly would not support any sort of subsidization at the Federal level. He just wants to stop arresting people for possessing pain pills or other alternative medicines.
Withdrawal from Iraq is not surrender. We won the war, spent trillions of dollars, and gained little. We can either pay to rebuild that nation for the Iraqis after we bombed that nation for the Iraqis or spend our time and money on better things. As Ronald Reagan said, “Regimes planted by bayonets do not take root.”
Senator, Dr. Paul is polling higher than 2%. He’s at 8% in NH and SC. Maybe NV too.
Last I checked, there was a poll of Iowa Republicans, 40+ percent in favor of withdrawal.
I think you may be a little out of touch with the base. Ok, I’m being too kind. I think you are a lot out of touch with not only your base, but the majority of the American people.
…P.S.
I was not a Ron Paul supporter until I read his book A Foreign Policy of Freedom. Upon reading it I instantly recognized that this man had such a clarity of mind that it astounded me. In addition, his book, a collection of his speeches on the Floor of the House, clearly demonstrated just how our Congress operates under a very twisted view of reality. Even if you are not a Ron Paul fan or supporter, I highly suggest you read it..it is an eye opener.
Lisa,
What is the cause of the terrorism against us?
Or better yet, name one…One substantive difference between GW and Hillary…Just one.
Can somebody please clearly define what War on Terror exactly is? Why are we in Iraq? Saddam is a madman, but (i) we funded him in the 80’s, (ii) he had nothing to do with 911, (iii) no WMD has ever been found in Iraq and (iv) bin Laden hated him and vice versa. The American death toll in the “War on Terror” is already higher than that caused by 911, and over $500B has been spent while our bridges are cracking nationwide. And you still believe in the garbage Bush and his cronies sell you? Unbelievable. No wonder the Republican party, and the nation as a whole, is dwindling.
What do Republicans stand for anyways? If you vote only along the party line and by name recognition, you are doomed to have Hillary as your next president.
You get the government you deserve, as always.
Lisa,
You are surrendering if you are deciding to froce us to kneel down to Saudi Arabia, China and russis to borrow money ont he backs of your children’s future earnings in order to fight a war in Iraq!!!
You want to surrender my sons to die in a war for Iraqi’s….while that would be bad enough, the truth is that the radical isalmists weren’t even in Iraq…it was the most secular nation in the region. The bush/clinton regime is friendliest with the most radicalizing nations (saudi arabia, Pakistan and Eygpt)…IRaqi women went to colelge and didn’t wear burkas! Don’t you know this?
do we think sadam was good? no…and we know rumsfeld and bush played key roles in empowering him! We say stop trusting these madmen! Since when did republicans become blind believers in those who tell us to sacrifice for the good of the collective…taking greater shares of our incomes for government waste.
Lisa,
By your statement “top issues that I simply cannot compromise on” you would side with Hillary (Pro-War on Terror) over Ron Paul (Against War on Terror) if those were the nominees.
Second, any freedoms being lost are due to the totalitarian mindset currently held by the American left wing. These are the folks who want a nanny government to tell us how to live our lives, what to eat, what-when-where to smoke, and where/how to obtain our health care. They do this in the name of compassion, yet their underlying motive is their own power. Trust me, these people are NOT part of the Bush Administration and oppose the Patriot Act just like Ron Paul.
Yes, we have much to fear from the Nanny Staters, but we also have AS MUCH to fear from the Welfare/Warfare neocons. The intellectual heirs of Trotsky, they expand State power in very Orwellian ways.
We need to move to a policy of low taxes, low spending, a respect for individual rights, and a non-interventionist foreign policy - the roots of the Republican party and the platform upon which George W Bush ran.
The only Republican offering that choice is Ron Paul.
- Rick
God forbid we should have an election and voters show up.
You are scared. You are ALL scared. You reveal your owners.
What’s funny is that the CIA experts agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy. I can produce you links to multiple books, interviews and articles by some of the CIA’s top (Republican) mideast experts that have the same opinion as Paul (how do you think he developed that opinion?). I’ve been searching for books and/or interviews with CIA experts that have a different opinion but can not find any. Since I’m sure that Vic and the people who share his opinion came to their conclusion based on facts, please point me to those facts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvu12z832Xc
You should have known the Ron Paul supporters would catch on to this posting and hijack it too!
personally don’t mind a person exercising the freedom to ruin their health (assuming that they’re an adult), but I resent them wanting me to subsidize their habit. - Russ Synder
I believe you are way off on libertarian priciples here. No libertarian would EVER advocate forcing people to subsidize other people’s habits or advocate any other type of wealth redistribution. You may want to check out some libertarian info on the net as you may in fact be one and not even realise it.
TO ALL PRO-IRAQ WAR PEOPLE
How do you plan on continuing this war? Have you seen the dollar lately? It is plummeting because we cannot afford our lavish foreign policy! It is time to abandon petty differences and intellectual vanity! It is time to stop having a naive trust in government leaders, who, by the way, DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU OR YOUR FAMILY! If I were you I’d be A LOT more worried about the “implosion” of the American empire, and stop worrying about some third world country. Once our dollar is worth as much as toilet paper, and believe me, this IS going to happen, how do you plan on defending your liberties? Everyone will call for UN and global intervention. This is going to lead to a world government, a trend that has been present for some time, but has been held back by America. We are the last line of defense. Imagine world government bureaucrats passing global laws! You will have absolutely so control over your life, and freedom will be lost. Do some research for God sake! This is real, and quite an urgent matter. Again, I don’t want to insult or attack anyone here, but please stop having so much trust in bureaucrats! Open your mind a little and at least consider some of these things. Its not about whos smart or who can have witty responses to some blog, its about defending our republic which is now under a very real threat. If not for your sake, then for your childrens sake! If you want them to grow up in a world of peace, it is crucial that you AT THE VERY LEAST do some research on the net about the state of the economy. Yes, terrorists are a threat, but our economy and our own government pose the greatest threat of all to us, you must realize this!
olfrt:
You may be of Arab descebt, but it’s obvious you haven’t spent much time in Arab countries. I have. I have never met a single Arab who wanted our military in the Middle East. Quite the opposite. They do not want us Kafirs (non-believers) over there. They resent their governments cooperating with us. Every single Arab I’ve ever met agrees that they would like the United States much more if we stayed in our own country and simply traded with them instead of moving in.
olfrt:
You may be of Arab descebt, but it’s obvious you haven’t spent much time in Arab countries. I have. I have never met a single Arab who wanted our military in the Middle East. Quite the opposite. They do not want us Kafirs (non-believers) over there. They resent their governments cooperating with us.
Every single Arab I’ve ever met agrees that they would like the United States much more if we stayed in our own country and simply traded with them instead of moving in. Sound familiar? That’s Ron Paul’s policy in a nutshell. Instead of listening to Arab governments, he’s actually listening to the Arab people.
@ Lisa
The left didn’t write the patriot act, the left didn’t install gitmo, the left didn’t elimintae the need for warrants for wiretaps, and the left didn’t give federal agents the right towrite their own search warrant and make a law that punishes up to 5 years in prison for discussing it. The left didn’t write the law that makes it illegal for a spouse to refuse to testify against his or her husband or wife, but the left WILL have the reins some day with all of that power, and you’re pretending that that’s ok?
Vic Sprouse, thank you for showing me your true colors. As a voter of Kanawha County (I live in Sissonville) I will not be voting for you EVER again! I don’t care if I have to vote for the democrat. You are a neocon just like the rest of the big-wigs that have hijacked the republican party. Also I’ll be sure to put up some Ron Paul signs right around your “curves” workout gym in Sissonville. Of course I won’t put them on your property, but they’ll be right beside of it!
To Gabe Harris: If you think there were no radical Islamists in Iraq before we invaded, I have some oceanfront property in Logan I’d like to sell you.
HUSSEIN HARBORED TERRORISTS, for crying out loud! He gave them amnesty! Also, to accept your assertion one would have to also accept that A/Q was in every country in the Middle East except for Iraq. Does that really sound logical to you?
Wow. I am just so disappointed by the lack of will on the part of so many Americans. The WWII generation would have never had this discussion because they wouldn’t have had to. They would have rolled up their collective sleeves and went to war to defend this nation. You anti-war folks ought to be absolutely ashamed of yourselves.
As for Aaron & John A., we’ve been through this about 1,000 times, so there isn’t much point in rehashing it. One thing though: I do not share the same position on this issue as Hillary Clinton. Your Ron Paul is closer to her position, I’m afraid. I’m more in line with President Bush and all the other Republicans in the race.
Oh yeah, John A., I guess all those Americans who died on 9/11/01 were “scaredy-cats”, right? I mean, they were among the first Americans to see the Islamofascist threat and take action to fight it (I’m specifically referring to the people on the flight that went down in PA.). We’re not “scaredy-cats”, John A. We’re PATRIOTS. When you attack those of us who want to avenge the deaths of all those Americans, you cheapen their sacrifice. Shame on you, once again.
The ‘Senator’, if you can call him that, is afraid of losing his seat because of all the people who are waking up and will no longer support him as compared to someone who understands the complexities and consequences of a flawed foreign policy, as well as to someone who does not deny the usurping of liberties has come and continues to come from our own government. The funny thing is people think they are free because they are not behind bars.
I would have loved James Madison, that kooky, conspiracy oriented, delusional founding father who was well versed in history:
“War should only be declared by the authority of the people, whose toils and treasures are to support its burdens, instead of the government which is to reap its fruits.”
“Each generation should be made to bear the burden of its own wars, instead of carrying them on, at the expense of other generations.”
“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
“It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.”
“No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
“Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other.”
“The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.”
This applies to the Dear ‘Senator’:
“The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.”
A question for you: There are no shopping malls in Hell, so what are you selling out for?
This applies to the ‘Senator’:
“The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.”
“All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree.”
RPP… (Ron Paul People)
Their postings say it all, they are a bit over the top, it’s either that or maybe some of them are just insane… Most of them will switch back to the Libertarian or Democrat Party after the Convention is over! Most of them are no different than Moveon.org or Code pink crowd…
To Ron Paul people - You do Ron Paul no favors by absolutely hijacking and filibustering a blog that is read across the state by reasonable people of all political parties… Please knock off the moveon.org nonsense…
Take care & God Bless,
Tommy Phillips
I apologize for the double post.
Todd: Paul supporters are everywhere, in far larger numbers than polls suggest.
Internal surveys of Paul groups show that most of us are not college students or nutcases; we’re disenchanted Republicans who are fed up with the fact that there’s little difference between the parties any more.
You are probably too young to remember, but Paul’s platform is actually the original Republican platform, which is supposed to be the opposite of the Democrat BIG GOVERNMENT, Nanny State platform. But both parties got hijacked by various NGOs and now there is really very little difference between the two.
Paul’s message and platform are not new at all. They are the same principles on which our nation was founded. If you call him a nut, you are also calling our founding fathers nuts. If you hate Paul, you hate the ideals on which our nation was founded.
I see my earlier comment was removed. As a matter of curiosity may I ask why?
Was it that I said Rudy was a composite of the Clinton’s - Bill’s morals and Hillary’s ruthless ambition?
Or was it that I questioned your commitment to the war effort?
Just wanted to know.
(see my previous post for deatils)
BK -
The dollar is crashing and not only we will not be able to afford to fight terrorists, we will lose everything we have here as well. You are obviously patriotic, and you love your country, so please do some research on the shape of our economy caused by the policies of the federal reserve as well as our extravagant foreign policy. You will see that our greatest threat is not terrorists, it is our own collapse. We can argue all day long about the war, but neither of us can reverse the law of gravity, so to speak. Do a realistic cost-benefit analysis of the current situation we face, I think you will come around and agree.
B.K.
Your association of yourself with victims of murder is absolutely disgusting.
And there’s a big difference between people who sacrifice their own lives and you. You don’t do anything to protect yourself or others for this “big Islamo-threat” you see. You simply post on Vic’s blog. Do you think that is what the WWII generation would have done?
Something (about 100 posts) tells me there is more support for Ron Paul than Vic realized…
Mr. Phlilips:
I share your concern for the country, and I am ecstatic to see so many patriots on this blog. However, it seems as though so many of your opinions are a direct reflection of the media. This has nothing to do with moveon.org or codepink, although the media wants you to concentrate on these trivialities. The greatest threat we face is the collapse of the dollar, and, if you haven’t been keeping up on the economy lately, its dropping to record levels at record paces. This is not about petty differences, or whos right or wrong, its about being reasonable, open minded, and coming together as lovers of freedom so we can figure out how to protect our republic. We can’t fight terrorists if we are all bankrupt.
With a few exceptions, today’s column called out the kooks and loonies. One wonders if some of these individuals should be seeking a complete mental health evaluation.
Interesting, too, that todays comments contained more (unneccessary) profanity and obscenities than I have ever noted. Does this give us some insight into the Paul supporters? Just asking.
BK, do you work for the CIA? If not, explain to me how you get your information and why I should trust it over experts from the CIA.
I don’t seriously expect you to answer. Everything you post is the same emotional talking points I’d expect from the left. Hillary says we need to stay in Iraq for years, Rudy says we need to stay in Iraq for years and Bush says we need to stay in Iraq for years. Paul says we need to leave.
Let me guess, you also think we should still be in Vietnam.
grannynance -
The dollar is crashing right before our eyes, have you seen the shape of the economy lately? Look, I don’t care if people call me names, that doesn’t hurt me. I don’t care if you disagree with me. But, for God sake, please research the fact that the dollar is dropping to record levels at record paces. Profanity in some blog is going to be the least of your worries. Like I keep saying, its time to set trivialities aside! We are all going to lose a lot if we don’t stop regurgitating arguments from the mainstream media, and if we cannot think for ourselves!
L said:
“It’s a sad thing when Ron Paul (supposedly a Republican) and Dennis Kucinich (certifiably nutty) are indistinguishable. But that’s the way it is.”
Indistinguishable? I guees it would seem that way if all you think about is those scary “islamo-fascists” coming to get us. They agree on two issues: civil liberties and the war. That’s it. Otherwise, Kucinich is a socialist who wants a nanny-state and Paul is free-market coinservative. Indeed, Paul probably agrees with Kucinich on fewer issues than any of the other GOP candidates.
grannynance said:
“With a few exceptions, today’s column called out the kooks and loonies. One wonders if some of these individuals should be seeking a complete mental health evaluation.
Interesting, too, that todays comments contained more (unneccessary) profanity and obscenities than I have ever noted. Does this give us some insight into the Paul supporters? Just asking.”
Yes, there are some Paul supporters who say things they shouldn’t, but I haven’t actually noticed much obscenity or very many loonies. I suppose when you’ve been spoonfed the fearmongering and lies of the mainstream media and the Bush administration for so long, rational and principled arguments sound pretty loony.
Also, I would not consider myself a lunatic, nor do I live in my mother’s basement playing video games and smoking pot. I’m a married, 27 year old law student who has been volunteering for the GOP since I was 14.
Funny enough, that was in 1994 when the GOP was swept into Congress by the Contract with America, in which they promised to vastly reduce the size of government, including abolishing many federal agencies and departments. This is almost identical to Ron Paul’s platform now. I supported it when I was 14 and I still support it now. Unfortunately, all the “serious” candidates want to increase spending, escalate the war, and continue to debase the dollar. As many Reagan Democrats said in 1980, “I didn’t leave the party. The party left me.”
Ron Paul 2008
I was born in New Martinsville and I’ve never been embarassed to tell anyone that I am a Mountaineer in my heart and soul even though I live in Florida but your Senator Sprouse has shamed me and ‘West by God Virginians’ need to rebuke this poor example of a neocon Republican politician. He is an ignorant man to make such unfounded statements about a fine and upstanding man as Ron Paul. You all need a lesson in Constitutional history because you have certainly forgotten your roots. D*mn, I’m ashamed of Sprouse and his supporters. Makes me want to puke. For those that don’t believe that I am a W.Va. transplant send me your email and I’ll show you my birth certificate!!
I was born in New Martinsville and I’ve never been embarassed to tell anyone that I am a Mountaineer in my heart and soul even though I live in Florida but your Senator Sprouse has shamed me and ‘West by God Virginians’ need to rebuke this poor example of a neocon Republican politician. He is an ignorant man to make such unfounded statements about a fine and upstanding man as Ron Paul. You all need a lesson in Constitutional history because you have certainly forgotten your roots. D*mn, I’m ashamed of Sprouse and his supporters. Makes me want to puke. For those that don’t believe that I am a W.Va. transplant send me your email and I’ll show you my birth certificate!!
P.S. I’ve done some counting of all the posts on this blog and by far West Virginians have bested anyone else for namecalling and outright indecencies posted. Look in the mirror Mountaineers!!
You’re a fine demagogue, if nothing else Senator Sprouse.
Maybe I missed it, but I’ve seen much crazier. I do a daily roundup on my websito of Ron Paul stories, and I almost always read the comments. This one is pretty tame, I think. Even the anti-Paul people, while a little condescending, are mostly respectful.
- Rick
Paul is at 6% nationally in some polls. Those are only landline polls that don’t include young voters. He’s got 8% in NV, SC and NH too.
He’s not likely to win, but he is sure as heck more relevant than some state senator.
Grannynance… Right on!;)
God Bless,
Tommy Phillips
A) because, well, he and his candidacy are irrelevant…
B) Ron Paul this Ron Paul that blah blah Ron Paul…
Make up your mind.
Sounds like you are upset by “the people” taking their country back. You make me sick.
Nope, Grannynace.
I cannot wait to see your name on the ballot senator.
Did I read this right?
“But, he is a media darling…”
If Senator Vic Sprouse wrote it with sarcasm, it’s undetectable. If he wrote it seriously, he’s delusional.
Anyone, supporters and detractors, could agree that Ron Paul is certainly NOT a media darling. Except for talk of the “money bomb”, he’s an absolute paria.
This is the first time I’ve seen Ron Paul referred to as a media darling.
Ridiculous and laughable.
Did I read this right?
“But, he is a media darling…”
If Senator Vic Sprouse wrote it with sarcasm, it’s undetectable. If he wrote it seriously, he’s delusional.
Anyone, supporters and detractors, could agree that Ron Paul is certainly NOT a media darling. Except for talk of the “money bomb”, he’s an absolute paria.
This is the first time I’ve seen Ron Paul referred to as a media darling.
Ridiculous and laughable.
what a loser, just wait, when the zombies come you’ll be sorry you ever messed with ron paul
You sir, are an idiot. It’s ok for the candidates you like to load up with delegates, but when someone with a dissenting view has followers that are merely seeking to utilize the process that your state has in place, it’s “hijacking the convention”. Did you ever stop to think that the only reason that Ron Paul supporters are able to outnumber you neocons is that most people have come to realize that the war is an atrocity, and a waste of human life designed soley to make the war profiteers money, and is actually making the U.S. more unsafe. You neocons still don’t realize why you lost all the elections last year. People are starting to see through the facade, and you’re days of “hijacking this country” are coming to an end.
For some reason all of my posts have been systematically removed. I guess the Senator cannot handle intelligent dissent. My posts were not profane, and I attacked no one. In fact, I attempted to have everyone realize that we all love freedom, we just have different ideas on how to protect that freedom. I will try one more time, however, only I will be brief because I am tired of retyping the same points over and over.
The dollar is crashing to record lows at record paces. This is due in large part to the federal reserve and our extravagant foreign policy. Given the state of the economy, how can we possibly afford to fight terror? If you agree with the Iraq war, thats fine, but you cannot circumvent the laws of economics. We need to start putting petty differences and intellectual vanity aside, and start thinking reasonably. If our economy collapses, I daresay we will be much more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. We cannot fight terrorism if we are all bankrupt.
Senator Sprouse, you have my e-mail if you would like to discuss foreign policy. I know I am a lowly peon not worth your time, but its perhaps the least you could do for quelling dissent on your site.
Senator,
Thanks for having the guts to say what you did.
It takes a decorated war veteran such as yourself to stand up for winning the wars no matter what the cost.
Wait.. what’s that you say? You were never in the service? Oh, you were in school.. that’s right. No time to pick up a rifle in service to America, just time to run your mouth about other people fighting wars for you.
You, sir are a COWARD in the most craven sense, of the worst type. I will vote against the wars and the yellow bottom-feeders such as yourself who defend them.
Signed–
A veteran
There are terrorists everywhere. Most of the hijackers came from Saudi Arabia (if you believe the official account, I am slightly doubtful). Have we invaded the wrong country? There are also many of them in Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, China, and everywhere in the world. Take them all out by invading those countries?
The Iraq war has nothing to do with 911 or terrorism; please wake up and look at your egregious government in the face. It is neo-colonialism (c’mon, embassy bigger than Vatican 14 military base, what else would you call it?) at the expense of many American and even more Iraqi lives. If that’s what you want, fine. Either Rudy or Hillary will not matter for you then.
Grannynance and Tommy Phillips.
Y’all are some sick twisted individuals. You whine about profanity yet you support sacrificing American soldiers and untold peacefull civilians in the name of Nation building. You both discust me.
Yeah, you’re so right. People are kooks and loonies because they disagree with you. Of course, that’s likely not true, but it sure beats having an intelligent discussion on the issues. Because then you’d have to think.
Oh please, calling withdrawal from Iraq “surrender” is so dishonest I don’t even know where to begin. Guess what? We fought the war. We obliterated the Iraqi military. It’s over. The US won the big international football game. Now it’s time for the Iraqis to pick up the pieces. By themselves.
If they want a democracy, great! Surely they’re capable of setting one up themselves. If they want some other form of government, then so be it. They are, after all, a sovereign nation. Who are we to tell them “it must be this way?”
Ron Paul is wise to point out the inevitable result in fighting undeclared wars. Even DICK CHENEY said in 1992 of the US withdrawal that “I would guess if we had gone in there, I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We’d be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.”
We need to just come home and focus on keeping our own country safe. Period.
From the looks of your picture I’ve been a Republican longer than you’ve been alive, and I can tell you that Ron Paul embodies everything the proud GOP of old held dear.
Very telling that it is far easier to attack the supporters than the policy of the only Republican who actually is talking about fiscal reform, small government, and lower taxes.
Neoconservatives, we want our party back!
Whats the difference between a Neocon and a Democrat? Democrats tell people that they’re weak and need to fear the Capitalists. Neocons tell people they’re weak and need to fear that small band of rebels with no country to call home.
Both want us to stay home and let the government protect us.
Not me - I want liberty, not wiretaps and surveillance.
tick tock.
The sound of inevitability.
By the way, you use the word “surrender” incorrectly. We will “surrender” nothing by leaving. Seriously, what will we lose? nothing.
What will we gain? Countless USA soldier’s lives, $Trillions, and much heartache.
Maybe you should listen to the teachings of Christ.
WV is probably one of the least libertarian states, and I doubt Ron Paul would even poll 5%.
West Virginians are used to being suckered by retail politicians, and will always vote for national candidates who can bring home the pork, and won’t scare them with talk of “abolishing federal departments”, or “ending the War on Drugs”. Dammit, we West Virginians love our Federal Welfare/Warfare Nanny state!
Why does Ron Paul hate America?
“among the 2% of contrarian Republicans who are against Bush and Iraq.”
Where is this 2% figure from? I think more than that in the republican party oppose nation-building wars for global democracy and our party’s big-government, amnesty-supporting, globalist, CAFTA-supporting, biggest-spender-since-LBJ president.
“With a few exceptions, today’s column called out the kooks and loonies. One wonders if some of these individuals should be seeking a complete mental health evaluation.”
We are not actually “kooks” or “loonies” the difference between Ron Paul supporters and their opponents is that Paul’s supporters have studied history and have learned from it while his opponents have not and are doomed to repeat it.
That’s the sad truth of it. People like this WV state senator are dancing around with their fingers in their ears, singing “la, la, la” while their country is in actual danger, not from the middle east, but from spending itself into oblivion.
Hi. I’m an Iraq War veteran that supports Ron Paul and the immediate withdraw from Iraq.
Saving the lives of our troops by pulling them out of a no-win civil war that is none of our business is not surrender.
I’m personally and professionally insulted.
Oh, and you’re dead wrong about Ron Paul and his chances to win. Just sit back and enjoy the show.
Surrender from Iraq? that’s straight up disrespectful to the troops who have sacrificed almost 5 years of their lives over there providing stability so those lazy Iraqi’s can get their governemnt in order. They even wen’t on vacation for what, 2 months? While our brave soldiers were policing iraqi streets. Our soliders are not cops, they are soldiers. Our soldiers have toppled saddam, provided protection so the iraqis can form a government and enable them to hold elections ( 3 of them so far ). I think our soldiers have done their job. Let the Iraqis contract out security if they need it so bad.
Also, Ron Paul is a real conservative republican. All you phony big government, big spending, nation building liberals are done. Ron Paul is rebuidling our destroyed party because of the actions of people like you. Tell me something, if protecting this country from muslim terrorists is the number 1 priority of the federal government, why is it they haven’t done anything about the borders since we have been attacked? Millions upon millions of unknowns have crossed that borders, even after that fence bill was even passed and the funds were allocated yet you goofballs won’t even build it.
God I can’t wait till big government republicans are a thing of the past. We all have better learned a good thing or two these past 7 years, my fellow GOPers. These clowns claiming to be republicans have spent so much borrowed money that they make the lefties blush. Disgrace.
I, for one, will never feel safe until Iraq is nuked. Thank god we got Saddam Hussein for the terrible acts he committed on 9/11. God bless our service men for protecting our freedom. With the Patriot Act, I’ve never felt free-er in my life.
I will do whatever my president tells me to.. and if that means losing my rights, so be it. He knows what he’s doing. Look at our great economy, I only have to work 3 jobs to support my family.
For all the people that don’t like the current administration all I have to say is if you don’t like it, leave!
FREEDOM AIN’T FREE!
It’s My Party and I’ll Cry If I Want To
For the record I am Republican. I wish I could say, “Always have been, always will” but the way things are going I’m beginning to wonder. In the recent months I have been called some pretty awful names. Glenn Beck likened me to a terrorist and now you call me a hijacker. So confused by r being accused of not being Republican I did some research to find the definition of Republican. I found the list of GOP principes directly from the GOP website:
I Believe… The proper function of government is to do for the people those things that have to be done but cannot be done, or cannot be done as well, by individuals, and that the most effective government is government closest to the people.
Me: Check
Ron Paul: Check
I Believe… Good government is based upon the individual and that each person’s ability, dignity, freedom, and responsibility must be honored and recognized.
Me: Check
Ron Paul: Check
I Believe… The free enterprise and the encouragement of individual initiative and incentive have given this nation an economic system second to none.
Me: Check
Ron Paul: Check
I Believe… Sound money management should be our goal.
Me: Check
Ron Paul: Check
I Believe… In equal right, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, age, sex or national origin.
Me: Check
Ron Paul: Check
I Believe… We must retain those principles of the past worth retaining, yet always be receptive to new ideas with an outlook broad enough to accommodate thoughtful change and varying points of view.
Me: Check however I subscribe to Ben Franklin’s advice to never trade liberty for security. Ditto for Ron Paul
I Believe… That Americans value and should preserve their feeling of national strength and pride, and at the same time share with people everywhere a desire for peace and freedom and the extension of human rights throughout the world.
Me: Check but our goodness can’t be spread with the barrel of a gun.
Ron Paul: Check However it said, “Share a desire for peace, freedom and human rights.” Not subsidize these things while we neglect them at home.
I Believe… The Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.
Me: but hanging on by a by a thread.
Ron Paul: Check. He is a big R Republican and a little l Libertarian. He has been elected to 10 terms as a Republican Congressman.
The thing I didn’t see was, “I Believe… in nation building, policing the world, spreading our goodness via the barrel of a gun and the war.” So how can I not be a Republican? I know I have to believe in Christ or I’m not a Christian. Do I have to support the war to be considered a Republican?
I have always been a Republican. I only voted once for a Democrat. I was 5 and it was in Mrs. Buckenberger’s kindergarten class. She set up a curtain and we took our Weekly Readers in and cast our votes. I voted for Jimmy Carter. I thought he looked smiley and Gerald Ford had already had his turn. That was the only time I ever voted for a Democrat. Ronald Reagan was the Commander in Chief during my formative years. As a child I wanted Ronald Reagan to be my grandpa. He was revered in my home and conservative values were instilled.
I supported the war in Iraq. I was angry over 9/11 and wanted to blow the whole Middle East to oblivion. I read Rush’s books, watched Hannity and O’Reilly. I circulated the anti-Clinton jokes, examples of media bias and pro-war emails. I prayed and sent care packages while my 4 brother-in-laws were deployed to Iraq. I cheered when the statues of Saddam came down and was proud of the purple fingers signaling democracy. Mission was accomplished. The banner said so. Yet the spending, the borrowing money from China, the death toll kept rising. The costs keep piling up and “victory” seems undefined and elusive. I still stayed loyal to Bush and the GOP but doubts began creeping in. The Patriot Act, the scandals, the carving away of our liberties combined with McCain and Bush trying to ram amnesty down our throats along with out of control spending seems anything but conservative to me.
I was actually called a “liberal” by my aunt when I expressed that I liked Ron Paul and was for a more humble foreign policy. Me a liberal and unpatriotic! I’m the girl who won the Daughter’s of American Revolution Citizen Bee. I had “We Stand Proud” and the Statue of Liberty on my class ring. I have a yellow ribbon on my car. I donated to the GOP. I am pro-life and pro-gun. I own a business and am married to a doctor (WVU Medical School Grad). I have never, been on welfare nor has anyone in my family. I am college educated, taught Bible school, drive the speed limit, don’t do drugs, didn’t even fill my prescription for Marinol when I was suffering from cancer. I was teased in school for being a square and teased because I always obeyed the law and wore my seat belt when we went cruising in high school. I always thought that those were pretty decent if not stereotypical Republican bona fides. Now I am labeled a Liberal and a Lefty? I sympathize with the Salem Witches and targets of McCarthy trials. To be accused of something so untrue is just wrong.
So when a man like Ron Paul is seen as a traitor to his party and a good Republican woman like me is called a liberal it is a sad state of things. Oh how our party has lost its way. As the song goes, “It’s My Party and I’ll Cry if I Want To.” If the GOP doesn’t want to include those of us who support Ron Paul they do it to the party’s detriment. If my fellow Republicans allow the party to take this turn away from true conservative values then maybe I’m not a Republican and longer.
My father-in-law is one of 13 kids and my mother-in-law is one of 10. They all live in West Virginia and I will be encouraging all of them to support Dr. Paul. So if you think this is a hijacking…well I’m bringing reinforcements!
Lol, Granny the best you can do to counter the insightful and well written Paul defenses are to mount ad hominem attacks. You might need a dictionary for that one but it encompasses calling people kooks and loonies with nothing to back it up and having the lunacy to believe that counts as a valid opinion. Does this give us some insight into Dr. Pauls opponents? Yes it does.
Perhaps you think Patrick Henery should have had a complete mental health evaluation. After all he did say, “It is the fortune of a free people, not to be intimidated by imaginary dangers. Fear is the passion of slaves.” Can anyone say ‘islamofacist’ and terrorist?
And then there was that loonie Ben Franklin “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Can you say Patriot Act?
I’d say that kook Sam Adams summed up the Ron Paul campaign with these words “It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds”.
Burn baby, burn.
And finally the gratuitous attribution of insanity and vulgarity onto RP supporters!
grannynance: “With a few exceptions, today’s column called out the kooks and loonies. One wonders if some of these individuals should be seeking a complete mental health evaluation.”
Odd. I went back and read all of the posts again. Almost all of the commentary - on both sides - seems to me to be cogent and reasonable, even if I don’t happen to agree with some of it.
grannynance: “Interesting, too, that today’s comments contained more (unneccessary) profanity and obscenities than I have ever noted.”
Okay, let’s tally up all the profanity - even the “necessary” uses - in today’s comments according to George Carlin’s “Seven Words You Can Never Say On Television”:
Shit: 1 occurrence
Piss: none
Fuck: none
Cunt: none
Cocksucker: none
Motherfucker: none
Tits: none
And I think you could even argue that Hotchney’s post …
“I don’t think throwing money at some middle-eastern shit-hole is an effective or productive way to fight terrorism.”
… would not have been nearly as effective without the inclusion of the colorful metaphor “shit-hole”, so I think this perhaps qualifies as “necessary” profanity, and if so, the entire set of comments is clean.
The defense rests.
Granny and Tommy -
First, let me try to put some of the commentary that you see into perspective (not justifying it, just trying to add some frame of reference). Imagine that there is a candidate that you support which represents liberty, honesty, and above all the constitution, whose integrity is unmatched by any candidate in recent decades. Now, imagine that on a regular basis, almost daily, this candidate gets smeared or marginalized by the mainstream media. There exists a tipping point for tolerance, and for some that point has been reached. So please excuse some of this language (and Paul supporters, cut it out - take a deep breath, walk away for a couple of minutes, and then thoughtfully edit your comments before posting).
Having said that, I am appalled at the abandonment of conservative principals within the Republican party. This war that we are engaged in is driven by our own fear. We fight and threaten enemies in third world countries that have no navy, army, or air force. On top of that, we suffer an incredible loss of life, money, and liberty in the process.
Nineteen individuals hatched a plan to crash planes into buildings, and succeeded in 3 out of 4 attempts. While the loss of life was tragic and should never be trivialized, one must ask: What about the first World Trade Center attack, or the USS Cole bombing, both by the same terrorist organizations? Is the difference between those and the 9/11 tragedy about the number who lost their life? If so, then what about the current tragedy in Iraq which has claimed many more US lives than the 9/11 attack, not to mention the estimated hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Would that not be a tragedy as well? Should we not take some time and listen to our enemies, who have clearly stated that we pose a threat to them because of our relentless presence on their soil? How would we feel if China were to build military bases in Mexico or if Russia would do the same in Canada?
I hope that you thoughtfully consider the above questions, as they are one of many positions that bring people to Dr. Paul simply because he makes sense. There are many other issues in which Dr. Paul has a well established and supported stance on, such as monetary policy, immigration policy, and tax policy. I highly recommend taking a look at his positions. Thanks.
Just another weasel Neocon. A word of advice, Dr. Paul is only the begining and merely the voice of the American people. The cry for freedom will never ever be defeated by the neo scumbags never.
Iraq is not a war on terrorism it is an Invasion.
Its just so amazing how so many people are brainwashed into believing all this BS about the
war. The war on a tatic
Looks like the Ron Paul people have hi-jacked this post…
“The Patriot Act in no way infringes on any American’s constitutional rights. It simply allows our government to monitor the activities of suspected terrorists & those who support them. Frankly, I’m not the slightest bit concerned about their rights, (as if they have any). Why are you??”
You really ought to be concerned about everyone’s rights and not just your own.
I DO care about the rights of suspected terrorists. They are, as you said, SUSPECTED terrorists. An individual ought to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, not until he is suspected of being guilty.
But clearly you are of the mindset that, as long as your rights are intact, everyone else’s rights don’t matter.
No thanks. I want nothing to do with that mentality.
Ron Paul 2008!!
I am 30 years old, married, father of 3, and lifelong Republican. I became politically active when I was about 13 years old. In the 2000 election I convinced over 50 people to vote for GW Bush while I was a full time college student and working full time. I also voted for GW in 2004 because I had no better choice but held my nose doing so.
I am SICK of what the GOP has become on the national level. No longer can we say with a straight face that we are the party of small government or that we adhere to the Constitution. Bush with the aid of Congress can’t seem to reduce anything. What is the point in me continuing to vote for a party that not only does not deliver, but makes Bill Clinton look like a fiscal conservative? With Ron Paul, I finally have a principled person that I can trust to not abuse power and spend and spend and spend.
Someone in the comments mentioned drug legalization. So what if Ron Paul supports federal decriminalization of drugs? The war on drugs isn’t even constitutional and besides that, it leads to prison overcrowding and many other violet crimes because of the underground market. It took an amendment to the Constitution to have alcohol prohibition legal but yet now the federal government can regulate food, drugs(illicit and doctor prescribed), and virtually anything else they feel like? What has happened to restricting the federal government to only doing the things that the Constitution says it can do.
I used to be a war hawk, but increasingly I like Ron Paul’s position and it makes sense and in fact echoes to some extent what Bush was saying in 2000. Our policies ARE partially to blame for terrorism against us. Certainly the terrorists are 100% at fault, but our policies which stir up resentment must be looked at or else we will be fighting them for decades and beyond. Ignoring root causes is brainless.
I suppose the author would prefer gun grabber Guiliani, or flip flopper Romney, or McCain (McCain Feingold Ugh), or even Huckabee who makes Bush look fiscally conservative. Thompson just seems very tired.
I finally have a chance to vote for someone I really feel will bring much needed change to Washington. That person is Ron Paul and I am proud to be running as a delegate for Him.
Why don’t you warmongering RINO’s go move to Iraq. You seem to care about it more than your own country.
I made a comment above and I am a Republican, very conservative, and can’t stand Moveon.org. Any criticism of the status quo is labeled as ‘Moveon.org’ or from a ‘Democrat’ or something of that nature. Goes to show some people won’t even question the status quo of the majority within their own party out of fear of being labeled ‘liberal’. The propaganda has worked. Oh, but there is no propaganda in America, I can just hear the denial.
Does anyone think that James Madison, the ‘Father of the Constitution’, was delusional?
How about Thomas Jefferson, or John Adams, or Patrick Henry, or Ethan Allen, and so on? I will pass on plenty more quotes of those you would consider ‘delusional’.
Oh, but of course, I am mistaken. Our government is completely honest, pure, and innocent. They LOVE us. There is NO corruption, and the Republican party is full of angels who would never tell a lie or deceive us.
People have replaced God with political parties. They put blind faith in the government and parties, the worst mistake that has ever been made in history.
War on Terror? Unprotected borders and ports, billions given to Saudia Arabia and Pakistan, trying to shove Amnesty down our throats (including Bush and McCain), etc. How about that diplomat who gave Bush full report stating NO proof Nigeria was selling nuclear material to Iraq, then Bush goes on TV and addresses the American people and LIES. Then diplomat holds press conference, and all of a sudden his wife’s identity as CIA agent gets ‘leaked’ from the White House. You really think Libby acted alone? Is this information going to get labeled as ‘liberal’, too?
I have lost so much respect for most in the Republican party who wouldn’t know how to balance a checkbook or read an actual bill before signing it. They wouldn’t recognize the Constitution and Bill of Rights if it was presented to them from the Almighty himself.
Funny thing, the British called the founders crazy and even ‘terrorists’. I think if some people who have commented on this board lived at the time of the founders they would have called the founders ‘liberal’ or say they were involved in ‘Moveon.org’.
It’s OK to dissent, really it is. In fact, Thomas Jefferson said that dissent is the closest thing to patriotism, not blind loyalty to the government or King George.
By the way, this article was directed at Ron Paul, yet some people are disturbed that Ron Paul supporters are making comments? You have GOT to be kidding. WV political website, so what? Is it immune to anyone out of WV from responding to articles that are written from a WV Senator or something? My taxes pay HIS salary. I don’t care what political party a politician belongs to or what state he is from.
Both parties are so corrupt they are basically indistinguishable. I seriously dare anyone to deny that. I seriously dare anyone to call me a ‘liberal’ because I don’t watch Fox News. Nope, I’m an individual, and a very conservative one at that. I don’t get news from the idiot box, the most successful brainwashing invention in history.
“The budget should be balanced, the treasury refilled, public debt reduced, the arrogance of officialdom tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt.”
-Cicero 63 BC
If Ron Paul’s supporters only represent… what is the Senator’s estimation? 2% of the Republican party? Why are the other 98% so reluctant to come to your defense in these message boards? It would seem that you have the 2%, sir.
Jim A, we’re responding to the ignorance of an elected official. Ron Paul supporters talk about the real issues of the day, while it seems other candidates supporters really don’t have much to say. We’re here and we’re mad as hell. As a republican I can’t see how any of my fellow party members can be happy with what’s going on in our country. The expansion of government under bushs watch, medicare part d, insane borrowing/spending, record deficits, multi decade low dollar, and on and on.
Keep in mind half of the country doesn’t even bother with politics, alot of them happen to support Ron paul because they recognize his integrity and know somethign isn’t right. These people will make a statement come the primaries and general. Ron paul is their candidate, and these people aren’t being polled. I’m not even including democrats, independents, libertarians, constitutionalists, etc. Alot of them support Ron Paul aswell, and their not being polled.
Ron Paul is gonna win. If money talks in poltics, Ron Paul is talking loud.
Wait until we highjack the country!
:p
Indeed they have. Go Senator Sprouse!!!
The idea that you have to be pro-war to be a Republican is ridiculous.
Go read a history book.
…”IN A TIME OF UNIVERSAL DECEIT TELLING THE TRUTH BECOMES A REVOLUTIONARY ACT”…
(George Orwell)
…RON PAUL 2008…
God Help these RPP and their families who have to live with them on a daily basis!
Btw - For the people on the site that are actually from West Virginia, if WVU wins on Saturday, they will be playing in the BCS TITLE GAME!! Go Mountaineers!!!
Take care & God Bless,
Tommy Phillips
Surrender Should Not Be an Option.
Read and learn you dangerous neocon parasite.
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=938
Senator,
Let me see if I understand this:
Ron Paul wants to get our military out of Iraq.
For months, national public opinion polls have shown that 65-75% (let’s call it an average of 70%) of Americans think we’re doing the wrong thing in Iraq, and want us out in six months.
Ron Paul says we went into Iraq illegally. The
U.S. Constitution specifically says Congress has
the sole power to declare war. Congress has not
declared a war since December 1941. The U.S. has
not won any of the dozens of fights it has undertaken since 1946, because the government has started those fights without a unified political
will and determination to win.
Ron Paul has said he intends to let young people choose to get out of the Social Security system. It’s a promise you’re apparently still young enough to profit from.
Ron Paul also says he intends to return the nation to a sound monetary system, in which the currency is backed by hard assets. You ought to appreciate that a lot when you fill the gas tank in your car, pay your home heating bill, or look at the balance in your retirement account against the number of years it will have to support you after you stop working.
Ron Paul’s campaign is drawing thousands upon thousands of young people to his campaign, many of whom are active in politics for the first time. I was under the impression that the Republican Party was looking for ways to attract new, enthusiastic activists. It’s got to be tough to grow a political party when you spend your time and energy trying to shut down the best recruiter the Party’s had in years.
Wow, my grandmother told me you better make sure the dogs aren’t in the yard if you want to keep your boots clean when you go outside.
Ron Paul has a lot of dogs, and the internet is his yard. Why is the internet Ron Paul’s yard? Cause it’s truly one of the last places on earth where anyone can be free to do what they want.
Soon America will be free again and you can all thank the Ron Paul supporters. We are literally saving your lives, so I don’t really wanna hear this crap anymore.
I am not a Ron Paul supporter. I am committed for Mike Huckabee. However, if the Paul supporters pay their $25 then they have every right to participate in the process.
It will be very interesting to see how many supporters of each candidate sign up between now and November 30.
by L “It’s a sad thing when Ron Paul (supposedly a Republican) and Dennis Kucinich (certifiably nutty) are indistinguishable. But that’s the way it is.”
Obviously you know nothing very little about Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich is a complete socialist and only picks and chooses which part of the Constitution he supports. Ron Paul on the other hand actively tries to reduce the size and scope of the federal government and supports the entire Constitution. On the Iraq war they may sound somewhat similar but that is where it stops.
Please get your facts straight.
Nothing will stop the Ron Paul Revolution…
CNN Poll:Ron Paul at 8 percent in New Hampshire.
When Paul polls over 10 percent will you apologize?
The more you struggle the harder we fight.
Ron Paul is building a Blimp to fly over New Hampshire
ronpaulblimp dot com
Ron Paul people OWN the interenet
Deal with it you warmongering whiners and neocon fascist losers.
“he and his candidacy are irrelevant.”
You mean the campaign to restore the Constitution of the United States…. I loathe you and you kind. You’re existance is testament to the corruption and inefficiency of our system to elect representatives with integrity and respect for our law of the land.
Jeremy,
I would only add that if they pay their $25.00 and are REGISTERED REPUBLICANS, then they have every right to participate in the process;) Good luck to your in your campaign Jeremy!
Take care & God Bless,
Tommy
Everyone, her is a pretty good article from Real Clear politics about Ron Paul & his supporters… Enjoy…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/pauls_internet_campaign_wont_g.html
Take care, God Bless, & Good night!
Tommy Phillips
It’s unbelievable how ignorant Vic Sprouce is..
keep your snout at the trough…oink oink
Israel first… Americans ..well just ignore them.
And how should we PAY for this war you so love? By printing more money out of thin air, debasing the dollar and destroying the American economy with runaway inflation? Is that Republican? Is that American?
you don’t think Dr. Ron Paul is serious.
We the People don’t think you are serious.
We are putting out money where our mouths are, and thats just the beginning. Wait till the Primaries.
Ron Paul rEVOLution 2008.
I tried to make a serious response to this, but when you said Ron Paul is a media darling I just couldn’t stop laughing. Listen, do you hear that? Those are echoes from the past in the GOP chanting for limited government, lower taxes, and and end to nation building. We don’t want to ONLY hear about it come election season.
America should be NUMBER ONE. Screw the M.E., we have enough problems to worry about HERE AT HOME.
Ok here is how this goes. Ron Paul is Pitt. Anyone else is WVU. Can you say 56-3. Thats right WVU over Pitt 56-3. And you name it on the GOP side. 56% Ron Paul MAYBEEEEEE 3.
You’ve been pwn3d. You can’t stop Ron Paul.
I am surprised by the posts supporting the war in Iraq. It seems that the overwhelming reason for remaining there is that if we don’t wipe them out, they will all come here and kill us. Seems to me that with such a huge percentage of our military manpower and equipment tied up in Iraq, that this might just be a good time for Bin Laden and his cronies to slip out of the cave and attack America. Our ability to protect our homeland is seriously jeopardized right now. Our borders are open and our military is engaged all over the world. Everywhere but here.
I don’t think that the threat to America will be in the form of another terrorist attack. I believe that A/Q are, right now, implementing the same strategy that they used to defeat Russia. To keep us engaged in a war on the other side of the world until we run out of resources. It worked with USSR, why wouldn’t they believe it will defeat us. USSR was also huge superpower when defeated. I think they are just sitting back and watching us defeat ourselves.
I also don’t think that anyone should be surprised that Iran seems a little uncooperative lately. We have invaded the country bordering them on the west and the country bordering them on the east. It is akin to someone occupying both Canada and Mexico at the same time. I guess that scenario might make Americans a little defensive if it were to occur. Similar to the USSR installing nukes in Cuba in the 60’s. If I were in Iran right now, I would feel pretty sure that the US is going to attack, and I can’t see were we have said or done anything to make them feel any different.
I will be casting my vote for Dr.Ron Paul and I am unconcerned if that offends someone or if they consider me looney. I truly feel that this country is in extreme danger, but its not the terrorists that scare me. And that’s all I have to say about that!
Some of us still believe in the constitution…why is it so unthinkable for some people to understand that Americans STILL BELIEVE IN THE DREAM THE FOUNDERS HAD??
They left an empire to seek freedom, not to start another one. Ron Paul doesn’t try to say what is popular this week or last….he abides by the constitution, and all of the worthless politicians in Washington did as well……Ron Paul is about the only one who truly is fulfilling his oath of office…..politicians are there to uphold the constitution, not do whatever they feel like.
Vic, I appreciate a variety of opinion, but I do not think it is fair to use the term “hijack the convention” with respect to Ron Paul supporters signing up delegates to the GOP Convention. I think that what they Paul supporters are doing is exactly what those who support other candidates are doing, trying to win delegate seats for their candidate! When you create party rules and conventions, all Republicans have a right to participate in the process.
BTW, I am having trouble tracking down YOUR military record….where should I look? Chickenhawk.
I shall begin with something about Fascism:
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
1.) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2.) Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3.) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4.) Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5.) Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
6.) Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7.) Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses
8.) Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
9.) Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10.) Labor Power is Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11.) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
12.) Obsession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations
13.) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections
Do you recognize any of these things going on around you in America?
~~~~~~~~~~~
Now you said:
“At the beginning of the convention process, I said an outsider candidate with little support, but with a strong grassrooots organization, could come in and make a statement because of the wide open set-up of our new party primary convention.”
“And, the problem with this, and the problem with me writing about it, is it only draws more attention to the Paul candidacy, exactly what they want.”
Exactly, and these kinds of comments only provide stronger motivation for Dr. Paul’s supporters to galvanize their efforts for his success. You may wish to hide him under a rock, but many wish him to see the light of day. It angers his supporters that you people keep trying to change the rules or dates of primaries to unfairly thwart the efforts of a candidate who is not the chosen one, who does not conform to the party rules.That is undemocratic.
“Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.”
Are you so certain of that? Where is your proof to back that up? Remember these people saying that are the same people who said the war would be a cakewalk and be paid for by their oil. Perhaps they will continue to wage civil war. If they do, it is their civil war, not ours. When they tire of war they will talk rather than fight. Or they will fight as they have done for hundreds of years. That is not our fight. We were wrong to go in there, now we need to correct our error and get out. Even Reagan changed his mind about the irrationality of mid-East politics.
“But, he is a media darling and he is a media darling for two reasons. He is different. And, trust me, the media loves ‘different.’ It gives them something to write about.”
Where are you getting your information? The MSM have gone out of their way to hide, ignore, discredit, ridicule, marginalize, and discredit him. Why would that be? They fear him and his straighforward philosophy that guides his every vote for the Constitution and for Liberty and justice.
“But, he won’t win the primary. In fact, he won’t win a state. ”
One lady in New Hampshire, I believe, was so disgusted when Geo. Stephanopolous derided him by saying he could not win rudely to his face, “That’s not going to happen.” in an interview, she signed up to do a solo thirty-eight mile walk to earn funds for him. A group of young men are doing a thousand mile cycling event across the country to raise money for him. The other grassroots efforts have been totally spontaneous and numerous in his support. People are changing their party to vote for him. I wonder any other candidate can say that of his supporters.
“They will attempt to hijack the convention, but they will not succeed.”
All I can say is turnabout is fair play. Neo-conservatives hijacked the Republican party and seriously damaged its ideals and conservative values. So you can really have no complaint that people want to take back their party or their country.
Win or lose we will do our best to support Dr. Paul.
“For most of history people have lived under tyranny,” Paul said. “The world still lives under tyranny, and our country is coming closer to that every day.” Ron Paul
“Our numbers are growing and we’re trying to stop that movement away from liberty.” Ron Paul
Our economy cannot continue to support failed policies and a world empire. This country is over $7 Trillion in debt with $70 trillion entitlements promised over the next several years. You and your children and grandchildren will be paying for that. Spending is out of control and the bottom is close to falling out. Around the world people are demanding Euros instead of dollars and we are hugely in debt to China over these wars. That is fodder for political and economic blackmail by China. The Fed – a private central bank concerned solely with their own enrichment - keeps printing funny fiat money: Cost of living goes up as the value of the dollar goes down. It is worth about 4 cents. The housing bubble is a mess and on Wall street when the stocks go up a hundred, they are really going down by other countries measurements due to the falling value of a dollar and other bad economic policies.
“[Economist Ludwig von] Mises told us many years before that it would collapse, that communism would not work because it’s fatally flawed,” he said. “Their philosophy was a failed philosophy and was doomed to fail. It’s softer here, but it’s just as seriously flawed.” Ron Paul
Stockbrokers jumped up and down screaming with glee on the Chicago trading floor when Congressman Paul raked Bernard Bernanke over the coals regarding the poor policies at the Fed.
It is my humble opinion that perhaps it is the Republican Party that needs to look closely at its beliefs and goals and agenda.
You are young and perhaps due to no fault of your own, not clearly and thoroughly educated in some of the history that you should have been, no doubt the fault of dumbed down education courtesy of the Federal Government. There still remain many of us who get it-either because we are old enough to have experienced bad times or have made it a point to keep learning, or both. In fact many people think it is more important to educate themselves and understand and get it right than to support a flawed philosophy.
Republicans have become Democrats. There is little difference between them. They all want to spend and tax us into oblivion with no regard for the natural consequences of their mechinations. Their platforms and electing people who conform to the party line is all that matters right or wrong. People will be continue to leave the party after the primaries as I likely will. And you will be scratching trying to figure out why. So wake up and do something about that instead of chasing away the only real Republicans the party has.
I honestly believe the Republican Party would rather lose an election by supporting a stooge to run against Hillary Clinton than support a strong candidate with integrity and common sense who may be the only candidate who can defeat her. Indeed, this year’s crop are clueless and completely uninspiring. Ron Paul is providing more excitement around the country than did John Kennedy in the sixties. And that was a lot of excitement. The People (70 per cent) want this warmongering to end and they want their country back before it is too late.
Thank you for reading this.
Apologies for the double hit here. It was so slow I thought it locked up,
Surrender is properly defined as: turning over arms and becoming a “captive” or POW, whereas “Withdrawal” is simply leaving the theatre of War with your dignity attached.
Ron Paul’s position is Withdrawal from Iraq (a War America was by all definitions.. lied into).
Slanderous Rhetoric is well defined in this article as “smearing the opponent with untruth to achieve a Political End”.
Yours in Observing War Mongering Neo-Cons “Hate America because of our Freedoms”,
Patrick Henry
That still 1,100 delegates were needed shows the party establishment’s failure to inform West Virginians, particularly outside the Capital region–which might just be the way they preferred it, since the GOP chairman McKinney (a Romney supporter) could then fill the vacant delegate seats himself, per the new rules!
Ron Paul’s supporters have actually done them a favor by driving attention to the very issue they failed to communicate, including for supporters of Huckabee and Hunter who also suffered by the lack of GOP party communication.
So just who was trying to “hijack”, through craft instead of open and fair play, the GOP convention?
Why are the GOP establishment’s so-called “top-tier” candidates (Giuliani, Romney, Thompson) members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a David Rockefeller organization that drives the agenda of NAFTA, virtual amnesty for illegal immigrants, SPP and North American Union (per Dr. Jerome Corsi’s interview on 58 Live), and REAL ID, which Senator Sprouse also opposes? Yet, we are told, these are our “preferred” candidates?
A well informed electorate is absolutely necessary to go beyond superficial name recognition and crafted public image to see just who the GOP establishment is still mistakenly supporting. IT IS HIGH TIME FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO WAKE UP, AND SEE JUST WHO IT IS THAT HAS HIJACKED THEM ALREADY!
The bottom line, Paulistas, is that your candidate wants this country to surrender to the TERRORISTS we are fighting in Iraq. If you support him, you support surrender AND proving Bin Laden right. It’s funny how you and Bin Laden want the same result in Iraq, ISN’T IT??
True conservatives understand the threat of Islamofascist terrorism and we will never, EVER support any candidate who advocates surrendering to them. Throw all the insults you want. Make all the fake claims about being “true” conservatives you want. Call us “war pigs”. Go ahead. At the end of the day, if you wind up not supporting the Republican nominee, you will have helped to elect Hillary Clinton as the next President of the United States. Then, when you’re paying confiscatory tax rates to fund her socialized health care system, you can look back on your ridiculous effort to elect a LIBERTARIAN and thank yourselves for your own outright stupidity.
Yes, they clearly must be Republicans Tommy.
Best wishes to you as well.
Let us consider one extremely important fact if Ron Paul is not nominated or elected as President. If any of the regurgitated candidates on either side of the party isle wins the election then by 2012 this country will once again have little more than the same continuing mess that it has had for the last few decades. Each party presents their loyal entrenchment candidates that receive their party seal of approval, they are the dandies of the media and usually the friend of multi-national special interests, but rarely do they have the actual best interests of the American People at heart. Ron Paul does and he doesn’t pander to special interests.
The Republican and Democratic Entrenchment Party memebers have each had their respective turns at leadership of this country and what has it gotten us? Both parties have become little more than parasitic ticks embedded into the flesh of this nation, sucking the life and the future for its people. The government has laid down at the feet of the international banking cartels, the military machinery death pushers and other special interests that seek their own profit over the best interest of the American People. It is time to put America and Americans First.
If we elect just another pandering candidate, which is all we have to choose from other than Ron Paul, then we will continue down this feckless road we have been forced to travel on for the last 40 years.
Every four to eight years we swing one way or the other, thinking, hoping that the next leader will be different, but alas we are force-fed the same reworked dribble, incoherent decisions, miscalculations, idiotic policies that have done precious little but drag this nation, its economy and its real nationa security into the dirt.
It is time for a change, a real and drastic change that will steer this nation in a very new and very positive direction.
I can tell you this, by the 2012 election we will have all wished that Ron Paul was elected. The biggest threat this nation faces is the collapse of its monetary system and the only man that has an inkling about the economy is Ron Paul. Think about it, many of our elected officials still think that our money is backed by gold…there is so much ignorance in Washington,D.C. it should scare each and every one of us.
Think before you vote, think long and hard before you choose one of those other regurgitated political ideologues from the Entrenchment Parties.
>>>>>>I can tell you this, by the 2012 election we will have all wished that Ron Paul was elected.
Sure. Either Paul or Kucinich, and there’s not much difference between the kooks.
B.K. Said: “The bottom line, Paulistas, is that your candidate wants this country to surrender to the TERRORISTS we are fighting in Iraq. If you support him, you support surrender AND proving Bin Laden right. It’s funny how you and Bin Laden want the same result in Iraq, ISN’T IT??
True conservatives understand the threat of Islamofascist terrorism and we will never, EVER support any candidate who advocates surrendering to them. Throw all the insults you want. Make all the fake claims about being “true” conservatives you want. Call us “war pigs”. Go ahead. At the end of the day, if you wind up not supporting the Republican nominee, you will have helped to elect Hillary Clinton as the next President of the United States. Then, when you’re paying confiscatory tax rates to fund her socialized health care system, you can look back on your ridiculous effort to elect a LIBERTARIAN and thank yourselves for your own outright stupidity. “
I will tell you what outright stupidity is…It is when you so-called “True Conservatives” continue to support, arm and train people that will eventually turn on this country. They trained, armed and supported the MAK, allowed the MAK to open 30 offices in this country with the help of the CIA to raise funds for the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan back in the 70s and 80s. The MAK later became known as alQaeda. Talk about idiots, stupid decision makers…this is what your so-called “True Conservatives” are doing now:
“WND’s Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein, author of the recently released “”Schmoozing with Terrorists,” said yesterday he received information much of the senior leadership of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group were told they will be entering U.S. anti-terror training courses for security forces associated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah forces.
The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Fatah’s declared military wing, took credit along with the Islamic Jihad terror group for every suicide bombing in Israel between 2005 and 2006. The Brigades is responsible for more terrorism from the West Bank than any other Palestinian Arab organization, carrying out thousands of shootings and grenade attacks.
Many members of the Brigades serve openly on Fatah’s security forces, including the Force 17 presidential guards and Fatah’s Preventative Security Services, which function as Palestinian police forces. Abbas last June appointed senior Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades leader Mahmoud Damra as commander of Force 17. Damra, who was arrested by Israel last November, was on the Jewish state’s most-wanted list of terrorists.
The U.S. has been running bases in Jericho to train Fatah militias since the late 1990s. Over the years, the U.S. also has provided Fatah militias with arms, reportedly including thousands of high-powered assault rifles during the past year alone.
In August, the State Department announced the U.S. will begin new training courses for Fatah militias in an effort to bolster Abbas against Hamas, which took over the Gaza Strip in June when the terror group easily defeated American-backed Fatah forces in the territory.
The U.S. training programs include courses in the use of weapons. They are being partially funded with a $86.5 million grant approved by Congress in April and are slated to be infused with more funds from a $400 million grant President Bush asked Congress to approve last month ahead of this week’s U.S.-sponsored Israeli-Palestinian summit in Annapolis, Md.
The training courses are to be stepped up following the Annapolis summit to prepare Abbas’ forces for their stated role in fighting terror in West Bank.
At Annapolis, the Israelis and Palestinians are expected to issue a joint declaration widely expected to include the creation of a Palestinian state led by Abbas in most of the West Bank.
Klein said he received information this weekend much of the senior leadership of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades are up for U.S. training, with some entering courses this week and others next month.
Some of the Brigades leaders receiving U.S. training were granted amnesty by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in June as a gesture to Abbas, but many Brigades members are accused of violating the agreement by failing to disarm and by carrying out a spate of terror attacks.
Among the Brigades leaders slated to join the U.S.-run courses, according to Klein:
Ala Senakreh, chief of the Brigades in the Nablus, plus dozens of Nablus-based Brigades leaders. Senakreh’s cell is accused of sending at least four suicide bombers into Israel, including a 2006 attack in Tel Aviv that killed nine Israelis and American teenager Daniel Wultz.
Ramadan Addassi, chief of the Brigades in the Anskar refugee camp in the northern West Bank plus several Brigades leaders in the camp.
Abu Yousuf, chief of the Brigades in Ramallah plus dozens of Ramallah-based Brigades members. Yousuf is accused of participating in anti-Israel terrorism, including recent shootings, attacks against Israeli forces operating in Ramallah and a shooting attack in northern Samaria in December 2000 that killed the leader of the ultra-nationalist Kahane Chai organization, Benyamin Kahane.
Senior Brigades leaders in the northern West Bank city of Jenin.
According to Klein, some members of the Brigades, including a deputy commander from Nablus, enrolled last week in U.S.-courses in Jericho already underway.
In “”Schmoozing,” Klein details how the U.S. has been arming, training, funding and coordinating security with members of Fatah’s Force 17 and the Preventative Security Services, who openly serve in Fatah’s declared “military wing,” the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.
“It’s scandalous that in the midst of the war on terror, our tax dollars are used to fund, train and arm the most active Palestinian West Bank jihad group,” said Klein.
“It took no investigative reporting whatsoever on my part to discover members of U.S.-backed, trained and armed Fatah militias are also members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group,” writes Klein. “I simply went around the West Bank and asked Fatah militia members, who walk around with American-provided high-power assault rifles, whether they are also in the Brigades.”
Among dozens of militants interviewed in “Schmoozing,” Klein caught up with Abu Yousuf, a Force 17 officer who received American training in Jericho in 1999 as a member of the Preventative Security Services.
Yousuf, chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Ramallah, is accused of participating in anti-Israel terrorism, including the Kahane murder after which Yousuf was extended refuge by Yasser Arafat to live in the late PLO leader’s Ramallah compound, known as the Muqata.
Yousuf still lives in the compound, where U.S. weapons are regularly delivered to Fatah. He is a ranking member of the Palestinian team that receives the American weapons.
‘U.S.’ training key to Palestinian resistance’
Now tell me how on earth is this in the best interest of the American People or our Nation. It is time to cast out all these “True-Conservatives” along with all the “True-Liberals” and PUT AMERICA FIRST!!!!
VOTE RON PAUL…THE ONLY CANDIDATE THAT HAS ENOUGH SENSE AND INTELLIGENCE TO DO THE JOB!!!
Sooo…since we’ve supported less-than-perfect people in the past, we should surrender to terrorists in Iraq? I’m afraid you’ll have to do better than that, Mr. or Ms. Anonymous.
I’m also fascinated by how you people always seem to find a way to blame America first, even if you have to manufacture so-called “facts”.
So many words in your post, yet it’s completely invalid. Next?
As Lew Rockwell, said, your column was hilarious.
Senator, you’d better start swimming or you’ll sink like a stone, for the times, they are a changin’.
There were not any terrorists in Iraq until after we arrived. Iraq didn’t attack us. They didn’t even threaten us.
They had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.
We bombed the crap out of it because…..we wanted to?
That’s psychotic.
Hey big spender of our families money,
I hope you know that the 300 people who have already responded to you will be able to make a pretty big dent in your next campaign…if your going to be in favor of stealing the fruit of our labor to finance military boondoggles then we might as well support a boondoggler who isn’t dumb enough to spread lies about Ron Paul
B.K. glad facts don’t make any matter to you. I’m glad you’re not a doctor.
If a doctor plans a treatment based on a diagnosis and later finds the diagnosis wrong he immediately stops treatment. The doctor keeps his mind open to facts.
I supported the invasion of Iraq and voted Bush 2 times. However, the diagnosis of Iraq was ALL WRONG. So we need to stop the current treatment and re-diagnose the current problem for a new treatment.
Glad you not a doctor because new facts and information won’t be considered by you and you’ll keep to the wrong treatment and wrong diagnosis.
B.K.:
You’ve had plenty of insightful arguments against your characterization of withdrawal from Iraq as surrender. Yet your only response is to repeat your assertion (post #307). If there are any impartial observers (and there probably aren’t), they would have to conclude that your arguments have been trounced.
Furthermore, people have opined on bin Laden’s desired result for Iraq. As a “freedom fighter”, we supported him in his fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It appears that he is using the same tactics effectively against us now.
It is people such as you who know neither yourself nor your enemy (read Sun Tzu sometime) who are playing into the hands of America’s enemies.
JC #262
The 3rd largest political party is growing by leaps and bounds. I’m seriously considering going to is.
(www.constitutionparty.com)
I’ve mentioned them to other republicans and they switched on me to the Constitution party. It is everthing republicans used to be.
We’ll see what happens in 2008 and I may be voting constitution party soon at this rate.
You can stick you head in the sand all you want, but we will still be on the rise. We are going to put our country back on the path that our founding fathers have created for us. We are The People. We are The Revolution. We are Ron Paul.
RUDY4PREZ WROTE: “Only Rudy is willing to tell the truth about Ron Paul and his crazy plans:”
And what “truth” would that be, R4P? That Rudy advocates the continued disregard of the Constitution by both parties that has led this country almost completely into financial ruin?
Please make a case for what Rudy not only WANTS to do to better America, but please provide his PLANS to do it. Then let’s put them up against Ron Paul and his PLANS, that he’s very clear on, and see who comes out the bigger (and much better) conservative. Let’s see who sees the merit in folowing the founding document of this country as opposed to just coming up with ridiculous ideas of fancy that have proven not to work.
You know as well as I, and everyone else here knows, that Rudy Giuliani is a complete advocate of maintaining Bush’s policies in every regard. If you were honest with yourself, you could objectively compare Rudy and Ron and you would have to (if you’re a conservative) agree more with Ron Paul on just about every single issue possible. But you’re obviously not honest because you’re here making unsubstantitated slanderous comments about Ron Paul when you don’t have the slightest clue what he’s all about.
And on that note, it absolutely amazes me how just about every single Ron Paul denier on this forum has proven themselves to be cmopletely uneducated on Ron Paul’s policies. I guess it’s easier to just trust your Republican icons like Hannity and Rush to TELL you Ron Paul is crazy. Have some freakin’ self respect and do your own homework! For God’s sake, we’re talking about the future of America here. Embrace the candidate who stands for everything AMERICAN!
What foolish statements.
Who is this guy anyway? Some Soothsayer? Hardly!
This guy must be forgetting about all of the people that have never voted, changed parties, etc….this isn’t JUST about being a republican. This is about being an American who still believes in the Constitution!
Ron Paul 2008
“Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.”
LOL… this is really funny! Lets hope a Paulite stand against him in the next election. He’ll be toast. Does this guy have half a mind? Who elected him to office?
Notice he uses words like “surrender” and “implode.” We are not surrendering to anyone. We are handing the government back to its elected leaders. We fought an imaginary enemy and enforced a UN resolution at great cost to future generations who would have to repay the capital. We’ll be paying interest on this debt until our dying day. The parents, widows and fatherless will morn the deaths of our brave soldiers for a lifetime. The deaths of more than 600,000 Iraqi civilians will haunt us for centuries.
Whether it implodes or not, it a matter of debate and highly speculative talk. If Muslims want to fight among themselves, far be it from us to stop them from pursuing their own political goals, with our without violence. The cost of policing the various factions is way beyond out means. We are hemorrhaging blood and treasures.
Seventy percent of the country wants out. I guess the GOP now makes up less than 30% of the total population. What did George say to Laura? “Honey, I shrunk the GOP.”
I notice the anti-Paul comments are pretty much limited to name-calling and predictions about the election outcome. The pro-Paul comments are well-reasoned and laden with facts. It shows the hopelessness of the Benito and CFReddie factions. Huck and Mitt can ride their religious base only so far. McCain is a brave and courageous man, but not much of a message. That leaves Ron Paul, the champion of the Constitution, gaining broad-base support across the nation every day. There is hope for America!
Joe S., it is impossible to “trounce” my arguments because I am doing something you refuse to do: support my nation in a war against enemies sworn to destroy us. Simply put, I am right and your position is indefensible unless it’s being evaluated by traitors.
It absolutely does not matter that Iraq or Hussein didn’t attack us. Would you have been more comfortable with leaving Hussein in power to torture his own citizens? Would you have preferred another attack on his own people with WMD’s? Perhaps you’re just fine with surrendering Iraq to A/Q and other terrorist organizations; providing them with a base of operations from where they can launch attacks on Israel and the U.S. These are the inevitable results of your and Paul’s recommended plan of action. Would you really be able to live with yourselves?
Yes, America supported Bin Laden when he was helping to defend a nation against Communist Russia. THE FACT THAT HE TURNED ON US IS NOT OUR FAULT. Stop blaming your own country and try a little patriotism for God’s (and your nation’s) sake!!
Last, your assertion that I don’t know my enemies is, at best, ridiculous. I hear them when they vow to destroy America. So do you. The difference is that you apparently don’t believe them or believe our nation to be so invulnerable that you don’t take them seriously. Underestimation of one’s enemies condemns one to defeat.
What we are doing in Iraq is right and justified. How sad that so many blinded and duped Americans have such a problem with liberating an entire nation and establishing an ally who will help us eradicate (yes, Paulistas…there’s THAT WORD again!) terrorism. I’ll say it again, all the anti-war people ought to be ashamed of themselves. I doubt seriously if they even know shame, however, because they so proudly bash their own country and President in a time of war. Bold-faced, treasonous subversives EVERY ONE.
Chickenhawk Sprouse is the type of person Andrew Napolitano wrote about in his book “A Nation of Sheep”. From what I’ve seen in this forum, he’s got plenty of company. The Constitution is the standard on which we must judge our elected leaders. Dr. Paul is by far the only qualified candidate to occupy the Oval Office.
Ron Paul is NOT trying to hijack the Republican Party. He is looking to save our Country. No WAR! No Income Tax! No Big Brother! NO KIDDING!
Welcome to the Ron Paul rEVOLution.
God Bless us Ron Paul supporters. I become more and more proud each day to be taking back the Republican party with every one of you.
Ron Paul 2008.
Semi Sane? — why because I don’t want to feed the beast known as Israel?
I want the troops to come home?
I want an end to judicial activism?
and a strict constitutionalist in the White House?
And “those enemies sworn to destroy us” - they disappear as soon as our ‘ally’ stops using Pali kids as target practice!!
Neocons and their knuckle dragging evangelical followers are Islamophobes - pure and simple.
Israel and her treasonous American cousins are behind this whole WWIII nonsense….
I have no problems with Islam. But i have HUGE problems with American Jews who hawk war on THEIR enemy and tell me I’M semi sane. — right
No one’s bashing their country. You’re just trying to wrap yourself in the flag since your arguments are infantile.
Just like liberals claim that if you don’t support affirmative action you’re a racist, you claim that if you don’t support a nation building effort in Iraq you’re unpatriotic.
Both of you are equally pathetic.
When was the last time the GOP ran a small-government, fiscal conservative who actually followed the Constitution? Sorry to say but the Republican Party has lost its way. It’s high time for classical conservatives to take back our party! Ron Paul is a true patriot and come election day, he will get my vote.
B.K.
My hat’s off to you. I think you’ve been slapped around even more than Vic has with all these comments. (I counted 21 smackdowns to you) Yet you still ignore all the arguments and hold fast to your point.
I wonder what happened to all those people from the Vietnam era who argued just like you now. Those who said how the Communist threat would overtake us if we withdrew our troops from Vietnam. Those who didn’t care how much money and soldiers’ lives were wasted.
At least pro-Vietnam people didn’t try to compare themselves with murder victims like you did in comment 222. That still makes my stomach sick with disgust.
At least you post anonymously so your family won’t be embarrassed by the absurdities you write. I will continue to pray for you that on your day of reckoning, God listens more patiently to your B.S. than Ron Paul supporters do.
When someone explains to me how refusing to support one’s own nation in a front of a larger war that will determine that nation’s existence is an act of patriotism, I’ll gladly stop questioning the patriotism of anti-war people.
I’ve asked this question many times and have yet to receive an honest answer. Oh, the question has been attacked and I’ve been called all kinds of names and insulted, but I’m still waiting for an answer.
…and as for this “infantile” business, which pattern of behavior is more mature: a) recognizing a problem or threat and dealing with it proactively; or b) ignoring the problem in hopes that it will just go away?
John A., I’ve specifically addressed several arguments made here in this forum. The problem is, I don’t always have the time to write the novels necessary to deal with every single assertion (no matter how ridiculous) made in the ad nauseum diatribes posted by Paulistas here. I’m convinced that man has staff members who do nothing more than scour the internet looking for places to inject their propaganda into otherwise intelligent discussions. Therefore, your accusation that I ignore arguments is bogus.
Also, how quickly you twist my words! I never compared myself with murder victims. I was asking a legitimate question about your assertion that anyone who considers terrorists a threat is a “scaredy-cat”. I was, and remain, absolutely stunned that you can say that after witnessing the tragedy on 9/11/01. By your logic, the heroes who brought the plane down in PA rather than having it flown into a building where even more people would be killed were “scaredy-cats”.
But…I understand that attacking the person who disagrees with you is a typical tactic of those who have no confidence in their own arguments. So yes, I will just keep defending our President and country on this issue, thank you.
The old “he can’t win” ploy? Really? Ron Paul’s fundraising is the talk of the nation, and he is rocketing up the polls in every demographic. Like you, the corporate media with its strong bias against Dr Paul cannot credibly ignore him anymore, so now they attack. Their fear is almost palpable. The problem is: how do you attack somebody who stands for civil liberties, peace, national sovereignty, and fiscal responsibility? … call him and his followers “crazy”? Is that all you’ve got?
It’s pretty weak. Isn’t is starting to dawn on you that maybe you’re backing the wrong horse?
Dr Paul’s ideas are energizing because they provide a powerful and optimistic vision of what America could be again: free, tolerant, honest, sovereign, independent, credible, and fiscally responsible. Meanwhile, Giuliani preaches a message of fear and cynicism. He’s as arrogant and dismissive of civil liberties as the current administration. His lurid Jack Bauer “ticking time bomb” fantasies stink of desperate demagogery, and his enthusiasm to endorse torture should give every American pause. He is the overt status-quo candidate, yet you cheer him on and write “Change West Virginia” at the top of your blog. Americans are a lot smarter than you give us credit for.
Ron Paul stands for the Rule of Law and the constitution of the United States of American and he takes his oath seriously.
This Senator just told you he absolutely disagrees with Paul. You figure our who supports
We the people.
As for me and my house we will support Ron Paul
It’s the Integrity !!!!!!!!!
B.K. said:
“When someone explains to me how refusing to support one’s own nation in a front of a larger war that will determine that nation’s existence is an act of patriotism, I’ll gladly stop questioning the patriotism of anti-war people.”
You also complain that you never get an answer or only get insulted. I’ll try to answer your question, and I’ll keep it respectful.
When people speak of patriotism, I must distinguish between true patriotism and nationalism. When speaking of true patriotism, I think about love of country and fond association with other citizens of your nation. I also think of love of freedom. When speaking of nationalism, I think of love for a country’s leaders, devotion to them and obedience.
When you talk of supporting our nation in this regard, it implies accepting the actions of our leaders and the rationale given for their actions. It is a nationalistic sentiment that I reject.
You speak of a “war that will determine (our) nation’s existence.” Many of us who oppose that war have studied history. While we condemn terrorist acts, we recognize decades of foreign interventions by the U.S. and other western governments in Islamic nations that have fomented anger against our nations. This doesn’t mean that we believe that we should roll over and die. It doesn’t mean that we should allow our enemies to have any advantage over us even if it turns out that they are justified (which is always debatable).
It does mean however that we believe that we understand what makes people become enemies of the United States. We believe that in general, people are human beings just like we are here. It is true that there are some very bad human beings - yes, a few of them surely do hate us for our freedoms. But most of them would live their own lives and leave us alone if we would only leave them alone.
There are many more arguments why the war against Islamic extremists is the war challenging our future existence. Let it suffice to say though that we reject your premise and would be glad to continue to debate it.
Many of us do probably think though that we are in a struggle that will determine our nation’s future prosperity. We fear tyranny. We are indeed concerned by tyranny from external threats. But we are more immediately concerned with domestic tyranny. We are students of the Constitution and recognize that the safe-guards in it are largely inoperable today. We fear an all-powerful executive. We fear a banking system that grants power to elites.
We are fighting a battle against tyranny. It is a shame that the battle is against our own leaders. I for one believe that is the nature of rulers who acquire immense power as have ours. The U.S. government was supposed to be limited to preserving life, liberty and property - and for good reason, I think.
So I hope that I have given you perspective into why we do consider ourselves patriots. We reject your premises and have adopted our own. It is quite reasonable to challenge our premises. But don’t challenge our patriotism. Most of us care deeply about our nation.
I think you’re going to be eating your words.
As an Independent voter from a Republican family I was considered a “black sheep” but I refused to join any party which offered no true solution to the problems of our country. So out of the paid political puppets comes Ron Paul a man that talks about the Constitution, you know that paper that the USA was founded on? And I for once understood the passion my grandfather (God rest his soul) had for the Republican Party the fevor in which he talked about joining the party and the life long commitment he made to it when he was just 18 as his father before him did. So I did what would make him proud and changed my party affilation and just to piss off people who think I’m kooky or not serious or just some spammer I decided to register as a delegate in a county in WV that what do you know doesn’t have enough delegates to even need to vote. I may not be a born and die republican but that doesn’t mean I’m not serious. Perhaps the point is that Paul supporters realize that sitting on the couch and rooting for your canidate isn’t gonna do a damn thing when it only takes about 15 minutes to change your party affiliation and another 5 to fill out the delgate paperwork put it in an envelope and put a stamp and put it in the mail.
However it is nice to see a Senator who has never so much as cared about an Indepdent non affiliated voter, get up and scream and throw a fit when they decide to invoke there “Constatutinal” right. Good luck getting re-elected even if Ron Paul looses I’ll stick around just to keep people like you from getting re-elected.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ” Is this such a radical idea if so please feel free to now Bash Ben Franklin.
Surrender to who? No, surrender may not be the best word. Retreat and abandon fit much better.
Ron Paul wants to RETREAT and ABANDON Iraq, which will be replaced with an Iranian backed government that rules the south, and Al-Qaeda back militias that rule Baghdad and all points North.
Do you believe Iran won’t try to take control of the Iraqi govt? Do you believe they couldn’t pull it off.
No, I guess they have no power over Syria and Lebannon. Hezbollah is just a figment of my imagination.
The consequences of RETREAT are dangerous. McCain is right in this regard, the Islamo-facists would follow us.
One other point about a Ron Paul rationalization tonight.
If we would have withdrawn our troops from Saudi, Bin Laden would have found another reason to hate us. The US sat by and allowed Neville Chamberlain hand Hitler every demand he made in the interest of a “lasting peace” and we know what happened next.
Heck, Stalin even partitioned an Eastern European nation with Hitler, and he still made war with Russia. The Saudi bases were just a public justification by Bin Laden. He would have went to war over the Turkey bases (which were necessary in 1991 when we still faced much of the Red Army) if we would have given in.
If you give your lunch money to a bully without a fight, he will come back and demand even more.
We live in a dangerous world where people will make war with us merely because they believe we have something that they want. Islamo-facists want to re-establish their religion as the central influence in the civilized world. They will not rest until they are defeated or Christianity is. I did not ask for this fight, but we are in it.
“Say goodbye to your career?!”
Many of these out of staters that network on their blogs and forums and spam comment sections of local blogs don’t know very much about West Virginians.
1. War protestors get booed even at most Democrat party events here in West Virginia. When Byrd was polling in the low 50’s only 4 points ahead of Capito, it was at the height of his war protesting speaches on the Senate floor. He shut up about opposing the war for the most part and went back to being “Big Daddy” and his numbers went up.
2. We have more veterans like me who do the booing of hippies than most other states.
3. Vic Sprouse is not running for re-election, and if he were, he would trounce his opposition yet again. He has racked up some of the largest vote totals in countywide elections on record since 1968. Most elections, he was outspent 2-1 or more.
Joe S., the following line, which you wrote, is very, very telling:
“It doesn’t mean that we should allow our enemies to have any advantage over us even if it turns out that they are justified (which is always debatable).”
It is not debatable that our enemies are justified when they strap explosives around their bodies, get on a school bus, and set the explosives off. It is not debatable that they’re justified when they fly planes into our buildings. It is not debatable that they are justified when they kill brave American soldiers who are liberating the nation of Iraq.
They are NEVER, EVER, justified. I marvel at how any American can say that it’s “debatable” that our enemies are justified.
Also, the notion that the Bush Administration is somehow inflicting tyranny on the American people is ludicrous. Under Bush’s Presidency, taxpayers received more of their own money back, the economy boomed (and is still booming, by the way), and our nation became more secure by enacting the Patriot Act. We’re rooting out terrorists and preventing them from attacking us again. How is that tyranny??
Also, I will continue to challenge the patriotism of anyone who believes their own government is more dangerous than Islamofascist terrorists. Stop blaming your country first and get behind our brave men & women serving abroad. Unite with those of us who believe in FREEDOM and think it should be spread to as many nations as possible.
By the way, my respect for John McCain doubled last night when he exposed Ron Paul for what he is: an isolationist who wants to surrender in Iraq, (and apparently all over the world, given Paul’s comments in last night’s debate).
TROOPS TO PAUL: “LET US WIN!”
BK-
My 4 brother-in-laws who served in Iraq (all from WV) want us out of there! We are a world bully and no longer a world leader. What happens when a bully falls down? Everyone is glad except for the bully. Russia fell due to financial reasons and we are headed that direction. Don’t preach to me about Islamofacism and danger while our back door is standing wide open and our economy is on thin ice.
Just as a drowning person can’t save another drowning person… America is drowning- crashing dollar, trade deficit, no jobs, crap healthcare system, civil liberties being taken away, lost soverignty, crumbling infrastructure, illegal immigration, governmental scandals, low morale and even lower morals. We can’t save the world when we can’t take care of ourselves. That doesn’t make me an isolationist it makes me a realist. Does that mean that I stop donating to tsunami victims, earthquake victims, starving people in third world countries? No. I am compassionate but let ME be commpassionate and not my government.
Please read Imperial Hubris, Nemesis, Blowback and Dying to Win and you will get an amazing view of our foreign policy. You may think Ron Paul supporters are blindly supporting him but the truth is we are very educated, well read and passionate about the subject of foreign policy and domestic fragility.
If you want to debate the issues fine but to make blanket statements like, kook, isolationist, wingbat, liberal, tinfoil hatter etc… well that isn’t a debate it is childish.
BTW- military members are putting thier money where thier mouth is and donate more to Paul’s campaign… that doesn’t say, “Let us win” it says, “Bring us home!”
Well said, JC. I’ll also add Ron Paul response to McCain:
if soldiers supported being in Iraq, then why on earth is Ron Paul getting the majority of active military donations?
Neo-con logic would ask: Do the troops not support themselves?
Oh, BK Here’s exactly where you compared your patriotism to those of the murder victims of 9-11 (It disgusts me even two days later; these types of heinous comparisons do nothing but destroy any moral legitimacy you try to employ–they don’t help bolster it like you are trying to do):
” I guess all those Americans who died on 9/11/01 were “scaredy-cats”, right? I mean, they were among the first Americans to see the Islamofascist threat and take action to fight it (I’m specifically referring to the people on the flight that went down in PA.). We’re not “scaredy-cats”, John A. We’re PATRIOTS. When you attack those of us who want to avenge the deaths of all those Americans, you cheapen their sacrifice. Shame on you, once again.”
It wasn’t a comparison, it was a REMINDER to you & the other Paul supporters that we are fighting this war for a good cause. Iraq is a front in that war and frankly, I prefer not to let the terrorists win it.
DO YOU????
If anyone lacks credibility, it’s people who refuse to support their own nation during a time of war, believe wild conspiracy theories which blame America first, don’t care if we prove Bin Laden right by surrendering to TERRORISTS in Iraq, and who think their own government is more dangerous than mad religious zealots who think they’re doing good when they kill thousands of Americans. …and before one of you Paulistas jumps on the “Iraq didn’t attack us” bandwagon, let me clarify: No, the terrorists in Iraq didn’t attack us on 9/11. Would you rather wait until they do to fight them??????
J.C.–While I commend your 4 Brother-in-laws for their service to our nation, I simply disagree with their, and your, assessment of why we’re in Iraq. What we’re doing there is right and it is justified, no matter how many kooky conspiracy theories Ron Paul and others concoct. (Oh no! I’m childish! I used the word “kooky!”)
By the way, did you hear how QUIET the auditorium got last night when Paul went on his Trilateral Commission/WTO rant? BRAGH-HA-HA-HA-HA! The other candidates actually looked embarrassed for him!
John McCain (war hero, by the way) confronting Paul on his ISOLATIONISM was my favorite moment. Paul’s Trilateral Commission/WTO/loonytunes moment was probably my second favorite moment for the sheer hilarity of it. I couldn’t help but think of Dennis Miller’s joke about Sen. Byrd: “We’re gonna have to do something about Grandpa!”
I also like how the guy who asked the Trilat question asked it. That’s exactly how I feel during my back & forths with you Paulistas: Do YOU REALLY believe all this?????
B.K.
What you call “kooky conspiracy theories” about why we were attacked are the FACTS, supported by the findings of the 9/11 Commission and the CIA. It’s called “blowback”, and it has nothing to do with “blaming America”. It’s just a realistic acknowledgment that our foreign policy of intervention causes people to hate us and has unintended consequences.
And you must not have been paying very close attention to that sham of a “debate” if you think that question you’re referring to was about the Trilateral Commission. It was about the move toward a North American Union through associations such as NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, etc.
And Congressman Paul gave a very sensible and truthful answer to it. He didn’t say anything that’s not a matter of public record. When Lou Dobbs talks about the same matters, do you think he’s a nutty kook too?
Every question they asked Congressman Paul was an attack, designed to bring him down. That was clear.
Let’s see. He’s the candidate who is raising more money than any other Republican this quarter, he’s won more straw polls around the country than any other candidate, he’s got more dedicated voters ready to turn out to the polls than any other candidate, and they gave him three minutes of talk time out of a two-hour debate and only asked him these questions:
1. Are you a conspiracy kook?
2. How will you punish women who have an abortion?
3. You can’t win, so why bother?
What a joke!
But what you may not be aware that the people who asked those questions, handpicked (out of hundreds of other people) by CNN, are democrat activists, some of whom were also picked by CNN (out of hundreds of other people) to ask a question at the Democrat debate last time.
So why would the Clinton News Network want to attack Ron Paul? That’s easy. They want to attack him BECAUSE HE’S THE ONLY REPUBLICAN WHO CAN BEAT HILLARY CLINTON.
By the way, before you start accusing me of conspiracy theories, the issue about the youtube questioners being democrat activists is all over the news. It’s been reported by Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh, among others.
BK, you said:
“it is impossible to “trounce” my arguments because I am doing something you refuse to do: support my nation in a war against enemies sworn to destroy us. Simply put, I am right and your position is indefensible unless it’s being evaluated by traitors.”
““When someone explains to me how refusing to support one’s own nation in a front of a larger war that will determine that nation’s existence is an act of patriotism, I’ll gladly stop questioning the patriotism of anti-war people.”
I can defend your right to do and think as you please, but I am not seeing you support your argument. So there is nothing to trounce. Please exercise your ability to think before hurling diatribes against those who have taken the time to learn their subject. It is a good thing to support your country, but not blindly support bad policy. Inevitably it requires a great deal more courage to become informed and to then support a view that challenges the leadership of one’s country when it deserves to be challenged. It is not America that has gotten us into this unjust war, but rather the bad policies of a few dangerous leaders. So people of strong conviction feel the urgency to stand up for their concerns for America. We have seen the beast and become horrified to discover that the beast is us-our own government! I would have to add that “ trouncing your argument… because you are supporting your nation” and that makes you patriotic, is suggesting that those who oppose your thinking are unpatriotic and do not support our fighting men across the ocean. That is an example of “Hilllaryspeak” and is intolerant and extreme by her own example and the example of numerous politicians.
>>>” for this “infantile” business, which pattern of behavior is more mature: a) recognizing a problem or threat and dealing with it proactively; or b) ignoring the problem in hopes that it will just go away?”
Exactly the point! Many of us recognize the real threat and are trying to deal with it by speaking out when we encounter blind sheep-like acceptance of dangerous policy and behavior by our government. Ignoring that problem will not make it go away. Ignoring the problem is how we came to be in the deplorable situation in which our country finds itself. We were asleep and now we are awakening.
“Also, how quickly you twist my words! I never compared myself with murder victims. I was asking a legitimate question about your assertion that anyone who considers terrorists a threat is a “scaredy-cat”. I was, and remain, absolutely stunned that you can say that after witnessing the tragedy on 9/11/01. By your logic, the heroes who brought the plane down in PA rather than having it flown into a building where even more people would be killed were “scaredy-cats”…”
I would suggest that you, like many Americans, have fallen prey to the fear-mongering out of Washington. It was tragic day for America on 9/11, but even more tragic, it was almost immediately turned against us with the unconstitutional Patriot Act and with the Homeland Security, now with FISA and so many other acts that are suspending habeas corpus, with signing statements, and Executive Orders, each one plucking yet another feather of our liberty from us. Our leaders used fear of terrorism as a tool to take away Liberty. Can you not see that it is they who have twisted things around?
“…What we are doing in Iraq is right and justified. How sad that so many blinded and duped Americans have such a problem with liberating an entire nation and establishing an ally who will help us eradicate (yes, Paulistas…there’s THAT WORD again!) terrorism. I’ll say it again, all the anti-war people ought to be ashamed of themselves. I doubt seriously if they even know shame, however, because they so proudly bash their own country and President in a time of war. Bold-faced, treasonous subversives EVERY ONE. “
No matter how bad their government was, we had no Constitutional authority, no right to interfere. We invaded that country on the basis of lies. It was NOT right and justified. Therein lies the shame. We do NOT bash our country, we bash poor policies of some very bad leaders. It cannot be helped if the President hitched his wagon to the wrong horses. Truth hurts. We were wrong to blindly follow and now we must admit our error and try to correct what we can. We are wrong to maintain an empire in a hundred and seventy countries around the world by manning military bases in them. The Constitution does not allow it and I sincerely question that we need to protect our country in that many other countries. We are in deep trouble if we need military in that many places. To the contrary, it would more appear that all these countries have more to fear from our government by our presence around the world in such great numbers. No other country is doing this. What is it that we are afraid of and what is it that we are fostering by our policing of the world?
You continue to name-call. This is the tactic of one who proffers no genuine argument. You call us “Paulista”s as though that in and of itself is a bad thing. In fact, I must say that Dr. Paul is only the messenger. It is not he that this revolution is about and he knows that. It is the message itself, the message of freedom and rule of law as set forth by the Constitution that matters. It would be just as easy to call you unpatriotic because you hate the Constitution and America, but that is not what most people here are doing. They are simply trying to make valid points and back them up with information and facts. On the other hand, you might gain respect here if you actually informed yourself and then gave your arguments using facts to substantiate it. Reason and rationality work much better than irrational name-calling, derision, and smearing.
Fortunately for Dr. Paul and for Americans, his freedom message brings people together.
For nearly a century, the agenda has been to divide and conquer, mainly through the collectivist mentality and constant waging of wars and sustaining of fear and chaos in our society. When people are separated into thousands of collectivist groups, it is easy to subdue them and manipulate them by pandering to and flip-flopping among groups, and with absolutely no intention of following through on promises made, whereas when people think as individuals, it is more difficult to control them and in fact, people/individuals who have a number of differences politically, morally, ethically and other ways, can come together for a just cause when they are united behind a valid philosophy because there is something important, and indeed valuable, to be gained for all of them.
That is what we are seeing in this movement behind Dr. Paul. Have you noticed the myriad kinds of people who are thinking for the most part as One, even with their differences? Of course the many “labeled” individuals can do this, but only for the right cause and we have our cause. We are indefinable as a demographic, but we are united for a powerful message. That message is bigger than its many parts; that message is the sum of all its parts-liberty and justice for all, and the rule of law under the Constitution insofar as it is humanly possible to achieve. Freedom in which we are born and living by the rule of law under our Constitution is a powerful message. We have strayed far from our liberty, but not so far that we cannot get back to it. When it happens we no longer resent our fellow man, but we embrace him as a brother and look forward to every man’s success in achieving his life’s ambition to grasp happiness. We do not wish him ill, only good.
I believe it is wrong to try and force our way of life upon other countries, especially with war. It is wrong for us to be even part of the reason for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis who have not directly injured us. It is for them to determine how they wish to live. Occupation of their lands angers some of them and rightly so. We here in America would never tolerate foreign military on our land. A few bad thugs, sixteen of whom were Saudi Arabian, by the way, do not justify our spreading war in to Iraq.
We are not surrendering by leaving there as we are not captured. The “terrorists” are winning by our staying there. It is destroying our economy and undermining our security at home in America. That is exactly what they want and when we have exhausted our borrowing from China and destroyed our dollar completely, we will then, finally be ripe for conquest! At the same time the rich bankers who fund all sides of these wars around the world grow richer. That is truly criminal! Look to history for the answers.
As far as our Liberty revolution, status quo candidates have become lost in their own cushy power and do not understand, or those that do, have no answer to challenge it other than the routine ignore, deride, smear, and destroy strategy. That is why grassroots works and that is why the other candidates cannot galvanize their own grassroots efforts, because they have no genuine philosophy upon which to build their campaigns, only snippets of parroted ideas regardless of party affiliation, all doing nothing more than to rearrange the constraining ideologies under which we are already living. They wish like many doctors today to treat the symptoms rather than address the root causes of our problems. With some of them, it is all about attaining and holding power. The sound consistent philosophy of Dr. Paul is what they fear because it forces us to think, to look for and address these root causes of our problems. They fear that we will discover them for what they truly are. They become frightened when they realize that we are thinking, rather than allowing them to do our thinking for us and spoon-feeding their not-so-great wisdom to us.
We can only self-actualize and achieve liberty and justice for all by confronting the truth, confronting the root causes of our country’s troubles and acting upon those ills. It is inevitable that we find some of those causes ugly or repugnant, but truth is truth and denial is a sure road to failure. The power of the individuals when they decide to come together is a scary thing to the usual politicians. The other Presidential candidates’ dilemma is that none of their usual strategies for winning, the most important thing to them, work when millions of Individuals come together as One.- “E Pluribus Unum” Out of many-One.
The intent to dumb us all down has not yet completely worked and America is waking up to truths that have long been hiding behind the flawed ideologies of our leaders for many, many years. I have not abandoned my search for the truth and to my wondrous surprise, neither have millions of Americans who want their country back.
Ben Franklin said, “We’ve given you a Constitutional Republic, lets see if you can keep it.” The time is at hand. If not now, when?
Of all the other candidates, perhaps Kucinich and Obama might be somewhat for freedom and the Constitution. Obama is not quite ready for prime time, but perhaps in the future he could be viable if the establishment does not get to him. Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton is part of the problem as are the others for the most part. I may be overlooking one or two potential ones by accident, but I think not. I respect and admire McCain, and agree with some of what he says, but he falls short of what our country needs today. Sadly, Thompson is part of the problem as well.
For now I believe Dr. Paul is our best and possibly last chance to bring our country back to its senses and save our economy, our self-respect, and our honor. It is not about party and that is why many are crossing party lines to vote for him. With Dr. Paul, the reason he resonates and makes so much sense is that his platform is based on a strong philosophy, not a premeditated plan to achieve power and position.
I believe if he had thought there was any hope of achieving his goal of freedom, justice, and a sound economy for as many people as possible, and a return to the rule of law as provided by our Constitution, in any other manner, he would have chosen that other manner rather than run for President. It cannot be easy for him and for that I honor him with my everlasting respect and love. He is a genuine patriot and American and human being. He is putting America first. His message is not a message of fear, but of hope and positive change.
At this point in our brief history, we are at a dangerous crossroads for Americans. We have been traveling a precarious path and that path has brought us to socialism, which is only one or two ideologies away from fascism and totalitarianism. George Orwell tried to warn us in “Animal Farm” and “1984” when he wrote of “thought police” – read Political Correctness and “doublespeak”- read Hillary’s thousands of references to “tolerance and extremism” in which she consistently manifests her own lack of tolerance in the most extreme manner, such that is now legislated!! Hate crime legislation is a part of this, as well as all such legislation that speaks to specific groups. They are all directed toward collective groups and are unconstitutional. When one tries to legislate for one group, then it treads on the freedom of other groups. We are not a country of groups; we are Individuals, united in Liberty.
We simply cannot continue to allow agenda-minded politicians to destroy us from within by our waging endless wars on intangible vague enemies. The war on “poverty” failed, the war on “drugs” failed, and the war on “terror” is doomed to failure because they are all indefinable, intangible, and destined to be endless, draining our already weak economy of the last vestiges of stability. When our economy fails, we are ripe for fascism and totalitarianism, because our country can no longer endure.
I believe you fail to recognize the real enemy in all this. The real war is being waged against you and me and all Americans. The war on Americans, to this point, has been working very well, especially against the poor and the shrinking middle class. I saw the beginnings of this forty years ago and now it has nearly completely come to fruition. We must take back our country now before it is too late. I believe we have the desire and will to do so. We must do so!
Thank you for reading this.
BK
Please refer back to post 303 about fascism.
BK
Please refer back to post 303 about fascism.
For someone that doesn’t have a chance of winning, yousure put a lot of time and effort into trying to discredit him..
Shakespeare said it best.. Methinks thou dost protest too much!
Strange, on November 30th, there was no daily update for registered delegates online since the previous morning by the West Virginia State Republican Party for the Convention on Super Tuesday, February 5, 2008. Interestingly, Ron Paul was storming ahead from way behind with committed delegates and now the counting update stops. Why? This negative article by the Republican Senator about Ron Paul…. What’s going on?
Vic said - “But, he is a media darling and he is a media darling for two reasons. He is different. And, trust me, the media loves ‘different.’ It gives them something to write about.”
I never expected to be criticizing Vic for giving the media too much credit. The media has ignored this unique politician for twenty years. They tried very hard to ignore him during this campaign. Eventually the fundraising and the internet buzz just got to be too much. He hasn’t become popular because of the media attention, he has gotten the media attention because he is popular.
Vic, have you talked to anybody from Freeport about their congressman? It may give you more insight.
Or maybe 70% of Brazoria Countians are kooky and misguided.
Vic,
the problem is you are supporting a runaway republican party is that it is no longer conservative. Bush invaded iraq because of a WMD lie, this is not a conservative value especially when our soldiers lives pay the price. Spending a trillion dollars on an oops sorry about that mistake war is not conservative fisical responsibility, and it jepordizes the security of this country. All imperialistic nations in history eventually implode in their own weight and debt, we are now no on a fast track.
you are correct that Ron Paul doesn’t represent mainstream republican politics. But if the main stream doesn’t change course then lets be honest and rename the party the “Liberal Republican Party”.
If you’re really looking…REALLY looking…for a true conservative, look no further than Fred Thompson. The surrender mentality of Paul & his supporters defies every founding principle of conservatism.
Now, if you’re looking for a true libertarian, that’s a different story. I, and the majority of Republicans, will never, EVER allow libertarians to control the party. NEVER. So, if you want to run Paul as a third party candidate & get your 2-3%, go ahead, but leave the Republican party alone. We will not tolerate your defeatist stance on Iraq. Deal with it.
Sorry B.K., but we old-guard Republicans are awakening in droves and coming to take our party back, whether you like it or not. Deal with that.
First, Paul is not advocating surrender, he is advocating RESPONSIBLE foreign policy and getting our boys and girls out of harms way!
Secondly, it makes me sad that you, somebody I had respected, can’t think independently enough to realize that you are being used as a mouthpiece of the neocon movement. The neocons hijacked THIS party. Trotsky-ism is what you believe. You’re no true conservative, you’re a Doublespeaker (read 1984 for Christ’s sake) and you’ll be the downfall of this nation.
I’m canceling your vote.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XaxdUPNYj2s
Who’s out of touch with reality bucko?
Bush ran on a non interventionist platform and taking out the Dept. of education was on the Republican platform not long ago. We’re going to run muckrakers like you out of town on a rail or die trying.
Vic - Nice blog and hope things are well.
Hey I wanted to comment on your piece about Ron Paul. It’s disappointing to read that you have no interest in accepting the fact that the Congressman has an appealing message to ALOT of longterm Republicans. But first, maybe you can tell us what happened to the principles of conservatism - something that the Republicans used to embrace? Where is the fiscal conservatism and the disdain for foreign entanglements and nation-building? What happened to the ideas of limited government?
The fact is that principles of conservatism have been entirely ignored by this administration and Bush has taking the Republican party down the johnny-flusher with him because they have so quick and willing to sell out the principles of the Republican Party. Too few top Republicans in the House and Senate have been willing to jump off the ship as it’s been sinking and they (and we as a party) paid for it during the last Congressional election and will pay even more during the upcoming presidential election if we support this ridiculous, unending occupation in Iraq and continue to saber rattle with countries like Iran. We as Republicans are sick of it all and have decided to turn a different direction, a better direction, and try to salvage what’s left of our party by moving back to our values. This “selling out” is why so many ardent Republicans like myself have turned to Dr. Paul. We feel betrayed and hope to now steer party as it should be guided - from the bottom to the top, not the other way around. Hopefully, Ron Paul will do well in our state and many others and finally bring the Party back to what it supposed to represent - limited spending, a solid dollar, less-government intrusion on all levels, and no nation building.
Senator Sprouse. NO VOTE 4 you!
Ron Paul has more integrity in his little finger than you do in your WHOLE mouth!
I am going to the President Dr Ron PAUL Meet-up groups all over the USA & copy this article and tell ALL of them not to EVER VOTE for you!!
Remember “WE THE PEOPLE” Pay YOUR SALARY!!
I think you lost a bunch of supporters/votes and are playing to the wrong crowd with you very unaccurate article on Ron Pauls candidacy. Instead of learning from Ron Paul you have decieded to attack him. I think its great you wrote this article because everyone can see who you really support and stand for which is this country or its constitution.
Correction:
“everyone can see who you really support and stand for which is NOT this country or its constitution.”
I’m sorry but do you even know what the difference between being a conservative and being a liberal is? To say Ron Paul is a liberal is like saying McDonald’s hamburgers don’t make you fat. Do us all a favor and look back on history on the difference between conservatism and liberalism is. After you research your information then rewrite your article.
This blog is a joke, Vic. Ron Paul is the closest to a true Republican since Reagan probably. Did 9/11 really change everything so much that the Republican party no longer represents its core ideals of fiscal convervation, limited role of gov’t in peoples lives, non-interventionism?
If so, I propose a complete schism for the formation of a new party representing the True Republicans. 9/11 was a terrible day, a historic, awful event. But it was just that. By allowing an event to dictate your opinions, you simply concede complete defeat.
The truth is, the establishment is deathly afraid of a true patriot like Ron Paul. They know that when he’s elected, their cashcow is gone. And like any parasite, they’re kicking and screaming and doing anything to prevent it from occuring. It won’t work. We won’t let it.
1)”media darling” really? the media acknowledges him?
2) Ron Paul is a serious candidate, of course I bet the King laughed at the Declaration of Independence.
3) “the one thing I can assure you of is that it won’t be Ron Paul” Makes me wonder what you know about voting system I don’t. Recount?
4)”contrarian Republicans who are against Bush and Iraq” You mean the real people of this country who only vote one way to avoid the other?
Senator Sprouse,
I am writing this from Iraq. I am friends with a Republican running for office in West Virginia. I am a registerd Republican from California. Your disdain for those who oppose war is odd. The WV GOP has many issues, the number one being separating itself from the Democrats. You can do this by speaking truth and educating yourself on reality. As an intelligence specialist shoulder deep in analyzing and assessing the current situation with the multi-faceted insurgency, I assure you that we will not WIN here. We will either leave this nation divided (a good thing in my opinion) or ruled by a dominant, cruel Shia majority festering with sectarian and political militias supported by Syria, Iran, and the Arabian Peninsula. Neither of these are the promises that President Bush made the American people. But wear your pledge pin, salute the flag, and watch your nation wither. I recommend you read “The Rise and Fall of Great Empires”; you will learn a few things about economics and war.
Senator Sprouse,
I can certainly understand your decision to get out of the political rat-race since the party to which you hold allegiance is anything other than the GOP of history.
Just because though, that you no longer believe that the Constitution doesn’t mean what it says, doesn’t mean that there are no others left who think that it does.
It is laughable to read that you think Dr. Paul is a ‘media darling’ when he was clearly kept out of sight by ALL of the mainstream media until they could no longer ignore him and those of us who support him.
Those who support his beliefs cover a broad range of Americans ranging from those barely allowed to vote to those who can barely walk.
In the ‘Meetups’ I have attended, the participants range in age from teens to the upper 80s, people who have become disenchanted (or better said – disenfranchised) from both sides of the aisle.
While surely many are libertarians, many of those didn’t realize they belonged in that group until listening to Dr. Paul lay out what we have lost through our inattention over the
decades, the group also contained arch conservative types and ‘bleeding heart’ liberals.
Indeed, the latter properly belonged in the category of ‘classical’ liberals, until socialists stole the liberal label.
Even that label has become sullied, causing the current label ‘progressive’ to be used in its stead.
His wish (and OURS) to get our troops out of other countries is only that which our Founders believed was necessary for our country to remain at peace with her neighbors.
Obviously, you think leaving Iraq would amount to ‘surrender.’
To any rational thinker, it really means we would be righting a wrong we had committed.
While I have no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a butcher, indeed, rather a creation of our direct assistance in earlier years and was no threat to us.
Your words that accuse Dr. Paul of ‘lining up with the liberal media and Democrats,’ reveal an ignorance on your part of how our Founders thought about interfering in the internal affairs of other countries.
If you would ever take the time to listen to him, you would discover that he wishes to see the country return to its peaceful roots instead of trying to coerce the rest of the world to accept democracy and wishes to devolve the power DC has ripped away from the states and the people back to where it belongs.
He, and WE, think that most all of the 1300+ federal agencies that were never authorized by the Constitution should be abolished.
If you believe that Dr. Paul and all of his supporters are lunatics, I would suggest you hit the books again to try to rediscover the foundation of our Republic.
You might find that you, and nearly all of your ‘Republican’ colleagues, have lost sight of the vision that brought this country into existence.
He may not have chance of winning even the nomination and may even be instrumental in putting a Democrat in the Oval Office and that may be just what we need to wake up the rest of the voting public who have mostly been dumbed down in government schools.
At my age, I have little hope left that I will see a return to unobtrusive national government, but I will do what I can to bring it about for my offspring.
Stephen C. Allison
Grantsville, WV
You are an ignorant hack of a spin doctor. First of all, Dr. Paul does not seek to surrender. First of all, we illegally invaded a sovereign nation that was no threat to the United States, had no ties to the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on 9/11, and whilst Saddam was an unsavory character, he was the CIA and U.S.A’s ally against other supposed enemies in the region. But that is another issue entirely.
My point is that this is not a war which the word “surrender” could even be applied. We are illegal occupiers. Ron Paul seeks to end our illegal occupation and end the kind of offense that we have imposed upon the Iraqi people whereas over one million Iraqi civilian lives have been lost since our occupation began. To call Iraqi’s insurgents, terrorists and anything except patriots for wanting our imperialist asses out of their country is a crime.
You, sir, are a kook. Ron Paul is a champion of the constitution and someone who the founding fathers would be proud to call a true patriot.
Regards,
Daniel F. Stevens
Senator, You are out-of-your-mind.
Please get ahold of yourself and observe, stop reading the pictures inside you forehead. Find out what’s really going on.
Senator Sprouse,
While reading this article, I was convinced that the person writing this blog was 16 or mentally retarded. Then I see in a response that you are a senator! (I ignore banners, sorry) No wonder our government is so screwed up. You have come straight out of MHMR to try to disillusion other Republicans that they are, in fact, Imperialists.
Now, who would we surrender to exactly? The Mexicans? Oh sorry, you were talking about Iraq… the country we’ve destroyed too much of and SHOULD leave from. Yes, I am a Republican. Yes, I voted for GWB. Yes, I’m very sorry for my mistakes and the 600,000 civilians I have voted to kill. But, Paul is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. We marched our happy butts in there, we can march our happy butts right back out. If the people need medical help, then Red Cross to the rescue. After all, if we leave, Iraq won’t really be on there own. The U.N. and IMF and World Bank have SO much of our money already that Iraq could be rebuilt several times over.
With Bhutto’s assassination, it should be more evident to everyone that this war is not designed to ever end. Stay the course? What course? What plan has anyone talked about worth keeping? “Stay the course” is simply a saying to get the people to impulsively support the agenda without questioning the motive. Shameless!
Ron Paul’s anti-war stance DOES NOT LINE UP WITH THE LIBERALS BECAUSE EVEN *THEY* WON’T GUARANTEE AN END TO FOREIGN OCCUPATION BY 2013!
Ron Paul’s stance is clearly his own. Better yet, it’s OURS. We have done enough since 1953 to keep Iraq in ruins. We HAVE to get. My house is worthless for the next ten years because of this war and its inflation. And you… IDIOTS… want to keep it going at OUR expense?
Sir, if you can be recalled I urge your citizens to do it. You are not a true Republican.
I am a Republican and I would like to state my support for Congressman Paul. Yes we are real republicans and we do support him and what he stands for. There are plenty of us conservatives who believe in non intervention and we should have a voice in our party. Weve had to vote for republicans for a long time who do not truly represent a conservative foreign policy. And Ron Paul is going to get us out of the UN and keep America sovereign. We do not have to vote for the lesser evil this time. Dont tell me that Im not a real conservative for wanting to put the interests of America above all other nations.
The war in Iraq was won back in 2003 and in 2005 Saddam was executed, they have had elections, we discovered that there were no WDMs to discover. What else do you want American troops to die for? What is victory then if not defeating Saddam and putting democracy in its place? How long should we occupy Iraq and for what purpose?
I would just like to ask you if you still find your article and your predictions accurate due to recent turnouts for Ron Paul during the caucuses? For those of you who don’t know Paul hasn’t been doing nearly as bad as was expected from those in power.
Rudy may not do well in Florida, Huck is out of money with people refusing to work for free. Romney is discovering problems with everything EXCEPT money, McCain well ……
Economic problems are starting to squirt through the crumbling dyke and people starting to get wet are noticing they are already ankle deep. And fingers holding the water back are starting to run for safety.
It could come down to the courage of the last man standing.
Ron Paul is the ONLY real candidate, the rest of them are crooks, squirming juvenile wack-jobs. Of course folks are excited about him! This may be the first time in a VERY VERY LONG TIME that those of us who understand reality and sanity are finally being represented. Because l;ets face it, there is a growing section of US citizens who have NEVER gotten to have a candidate in presidential office that we agreed with. EVER. Now tell me, what’s democratic about THAT?
I thought the “Change WV” idea might be a good one, but now I see where you are REALLY coming from. Another STATE RAPIST. Join the ranks of Governor Manchin and his State Cop Goons. Sorry.
Dear Senator Sprouse,
Your sentiments summarize exactly what is wrong with the Republican Party; namely abandonment of conservative principles. Bush and his cronies have promoted bloated government, record deficits, reckless wars, stupid trade policies, and debased the currency. At least the Democrats are honest about being the party of big government.
If you think that Ron Paul’s positions represent the 2% fringe, you are sorely mistaken. Your use of the term “hijack” for citizens exercising their constitutional rights is both arrogant and offensive. No wonder the WV Republican Party is nowhere. Nationally, the 2008 election, will make 2006 look like the good old days.
I have voted Republican for decades, but will not be supporting the insanity of John McCain: Jobs are gone, Illegal immigrants stay, pick fights with Putin, and inflate the currency to finance the wars and welfare state. Is that what you call a serious candidate ? Have you noticed that none of the candidates want to be associated with Bush ? They all try to present themselves as a Reagan. Reagan was smart enough to realize that Lebanon was not vital to US interests and correct his mistake.
Chances are Ron Paul will not win, but he has awakened a lot of us. I view him as a prophet. There is no need for a political party that has abandoned its core values.
Greetings, Politician Sprouse. Your post is extremely mis-leading. Dr. Paul advocates a pro-American foreign policy - not the neocon’s leftist social engineering at the barrel of a gun, which makes America and American troops a target in situations that had no bearing on our security until the political criminals put us at risk by intervening. These crimes, such as the unConstitutional invasion and occupation of (previously) Ba’athist - and opposed to Radical Islam - Iraq, are the real surrender and Dr. Paul opposes them.
Though (or because) he upholds his oath of office and defends the Constitution unlike almost everyone else in DC, he is anything but a media darling. You know as well as I do that the main stream media is ignoring him as much as possible, depriving him of a fair amount of time at the debates and mischaracterizing his principled Constitutional conservatism. Hey, they’re doing the same thing as you.
And speaking of hijacking the process, that’s what certain establishment Republicans have been doing even though he is the only Real Republican in the race and has been attracting lots of energetic, knowledgable and youthful voters to the party. If you and the rest of the big government-feeders-at-the-public-trough don’t cease and desist from the disinformation and the dirty tricks, the GOP will be crushed in November. In that case, it will deserve it’s fate. You, Senator Sprouse, will be one of the persons individually responsible for the party’s and nation’s distress.
Wow, Paul’s 1% is West Virginia got him 3 delegates…cool!