Ron Paul for President

[phast]

So I have been watching the debates both Republican and Democrat and I have really enjoyed to Ron Paul. Have any of you heard of him and what do you think of him? YouTube him and watch what he stands for. I think he wants to get our country back to what it has been like in the past and I think that is great.


So what do you think?

[JCJanko]

Can't disagree with him on much.

[FORD]

I respect Ron Paul a great deal, because he has consistently opposed this sickening PNAC foreign policy from day one, and he's not afraid to speak the truth about the REAL causes of 9-11-01.

It's his domestic agenda that would be troubling. Paul is more of a Libertarian than an actual Republican, and he subscribes to the Libertarian fairytale that the federal government should be exactly what it was in 1787. That's just not realistic. Is there waste in government? Absolutely. Most of it, especially in the current Fraudministration, comes from the so-called "defense" budget. And unfortunately, that would probably be the last thing that the Libertarian fairytale believers would cut.

But it doesn't matter, because the GOP establishment is already trying to exclude Paul from the debates completely, much like the DLC corporatists did to Dennis Kucinich in 2004.

[voivod]

Yes!! Ru Paul For President!! 2 0 0 8 !!!!

We could have Drag Fridays. Everyone dress up as their favorite opposite sex movie character on Fridays. Can you Imagine!!! RU PAUL for PREZ!!!

[FORD]

Yes!! Ru Paul For President!! 2 0 0 8 !!!!

We could have Drag Fridays. Everyone dress up as their favorite opposite sex movie character on Fridays. Can you Imagine!!! RU PAUL for PREZ!!!

And he could be his own First Lady.

[JasonG5150]

I respect Ron Paul a great deal, because he has consistently opposed this sickening PNAC foreign policy from day one, and he's not afraid to speak the truth about the REAL causes of 9-11-01.

It's his domestic agenda that would be troubling. Paul is more of a Libertarian than an actual Republican, and he subscribes to the Libertarian fairytale that the federal government should be exactly what it was in 1787. That's just not realistic. Is there waste in government? Absolutely. Most of it, especially in the current Fraudministration, comes from the so-called "defense" budget. And unfortunately, that would probably be the last thing that the Libertarian fairytale believers would cut.

But it doesn't matter, because the GOP establishment is already trying to exclude Paul from the debates completely, much like the DLC corporatists did to Dennis Kucinich in 2004.

REAL cause? guilani was right. They attacked us because they hate our freedom of religion, speech and our women's rights.

[FORD]

REAL cause? guilani was right. They attacked us because they hate our freedom of religion, speech and our women's rights.

Romans 1:22
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools..."

[VAREB]

I voted for Dr. Paul in 1988 when he ran as a Libertarian. I would probably vote for him again, but he's got about as much chance as I do to get the nomination.

Ford, I think you may have missed the boat on the Libertarian opinon on defense spending. Most Libertarians are for a small stream lined defense. The army and navy under a Libertarian system would defend american borders and wouldn't have it's nose stuck in everyone's business all over the world. Some are in favor of no standing army at all. Only citizen soldiers.

In one of Thomas Jeffersons (probably the most Libertarian of all the presidents) state of the union addresses, he had been pressured to build some new ships for the navy. Jefferson said something to the effect of having these nice new ships will only tempt us to find a reason to use them.

Anyhow, I haven't followed Dr. Paul since he degraded into the Republican party, but I assume his position on defense would be similar

[JCJanko]

I respect Ron Paul a great deal, because he has consistently opposed this sickening PNAC foreign policy from day one, and he's not afraid to speak the truth about the REAL causes of 9-11-01.

It's his domestic agenda that would be troubling. Paul is more of a Libertarian than an actual Republican, and he subscribes to the Libertarian fairytale that the federal government should be exactly what it was in 1787. That's just not realistic. Is there waste in government? Absolutely. Most of it, especially in the current Fraudministration, comes from the so-called "defense" budget. And unfortunately, that would probably be the last thing that the Libertarian fairytale believers would cut.

But it doesn't matter, because the GOP establishment is already trying to exclude Paul from the debates completely, much like the DLC corporatists did to Dennis Kucinich in 2004.

This is very telling. You consider the role of the federal government laid out by the founders a "fairytale." Then, you say there is waste in the federal government, but the thing you see as the biggest waste is the only indisputable constitutionally granted form of spending: the military.

This is exactly why it annoys me when the left claims they are the true protecters of the Constitution. At least you have the balls to admit you hate it.

[VAREB]

This is very telling. You consider the role of the federal government laid out by the founders a "fairytale." Then, you say there is waste in the federal government, but the thing you see as the biggest waste is the only indisputable constitutionally granted form of spending: the military.

This is exactly why it annoys me when the left claims they are the true protecters of the Constitution. At least you have the balls to admit you hate it.

You're absolutely right. There's nothing "fairy tale" about the Constitution as the framers intended. We could return to this form of governement easily with only a few amendments necessary to allow for how times have changed to a certain degree.

It would however take us as Americans some getting used to. We would have to learn to be responsible for ourselves and learn to operate without our government safety net. Ohhh, but how exhilarating our new found freedom would be!

Can't remember if it was Patrick Henry or Ben Franklin who said "those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither"

I like that!

[weesfreewheelin]

Jefferson said something to the effect of having these nice new ships will only tempt us to find a reason to use them.

I suppose we really shouldn't have all those nice new nuclear weapons stockpiled either. Iran or North Korea might find a reason for us to use them.

[jimmy812]

Every politician says something that people like. It's like they spew out good, positive things that the American people will eat up and then all the bad things (that eventually rise to the surface) are hidden in the small print.

Bottom line is which candidate will screw us over the least?

[VAREB]

I suppose we really shouldn't have all those nice new nuclear weapons stockpiled either. Iran or North Korea might find a reason for us to use them.

This is part of how times have changed. A nuclear strike that can reach you in minutes was not considered in Jeffersons day. It was hard for the English to sneak up on us in the early 1800's. I'm sure that Jefferson as well as most Libertarians would be in favor of a small nuclear arsenal to act as a deterrent to our enemies. It doesn't take many. Just ask the Japanese.

Every politician says something that people like. It's like they spew out good, positive things that the American people will eat up and then all the bad things (that eventually rise to the surface) are hidden in the small print.

Bottom line is which candidate will screw us over the least?

Now there's a slogan. Vote for Joe Blow! He'll screw you over the least!

[FORD]

This is very telling. You consider the role of the federal government laid out by the founders a "fairytale." Then, you say there is waste in the federal government, but the thing you see as the biggest waste is the only indisputable constitutionally granted form of spending: the military.

This is exactly why it annoys me when the left claims they are the true protecters of the Constitution. At least you have the balls to admit you hate it.

It's a fairytale because it's not the same world as 1787. It's not the same country, even.

And when I mention waste in the defense budget, I'm referring to the fact that most of the money is spent on anything BUT defense. How many billions has the BCE "lost" daily in Iraq? And how much of it has ended up in the pockets of Halliburton, Bechtel, Blackwater, and other CRIMINAL corporations, the very existence of which would have driven Tom Jefferson to projectile vomiting.

Ike Eisenhower, the first (and least harmful) of the BCE presidents, saw this "military-industrial complex" (his own name for it) in the early stages, and he warned us in his final Presidential address that it would be the destruction of this nation, if not very tightly controlled.....



...... sadly, Ike's warnings were ignored and his predictions came true. The PNAC war has nothing to do with freedom or terrorism. It has everything to do with feeding this Satanic beast of the so called "defense" industry. For without wars, who the fuck would buy weapons?

Old Ike must be doing somersaults in his grave.

[VAREB]

It's a fairytale because it's not the same world as 1787. It's not the same country, even.

And when I mention waste in the defense budget, I'm referring to the fact that most of the money is spent on anything BUT defense. How many billions has the BCE "lost" daily in Iraq? And how much of it has ended up in the pockets of Halliburton, Bechtel, Blackwater, and other CRIMINAL corporations, the very existence of which would have driven Tom Jefferson to projectile vomiting.

Ike Eisenhower, the first (and least harmful) of the BCE presidents, saw this "military-industrial complex" (his own name for it) in the early stages, and he warned us in his final Presidential address that it would be the destruction of this nation, if not very tightly controlled.....



...... sadly, Ike's warnings were ignored and his predictions came true. The PNAC war has nothing to do with freedom or terrorism. It has everything to do with feeding this Satanic beast of the so called "defense" industry. For without wars, who the fuck would buy weapons?

Old Ike must be doing somersaults in his grave.

If your point is that the defense budget is wasteful, bloated and corrupt, then you'll get no arguement here.

I think if you'll check, you'll get no arguement from Dr. Paul or the Libertairans either.