Ron Paul – “A Complete Nutcase Conspiratorialist Quasi-Anti-Semitic Leftwing American-Hating Nutball.”

ron-paul-joker.jpg

While I have my stated opposition to Ron Paul as President given his Blame America First Isolationism and stupidity in the face of Jihadists – this particular article caught my eye.

You can file it under the “Follow The Money” heading – and when you follow the money given to the Ron Paul Campaign – you discover some frightening details about the ideologues who are supporting Ron Paul for President.

They are not Conservatives, or Republicans, or Constitutionalists – they are rabid Anti-American moveOn.org Leftists that are using the Ron Paul campaign to sabotage the GOP and they are attracting a host of GOP disaffected conservatives and anti-war pacifists to a banner that will do more harm than any good. I commented on this back in August that moveOn.org Anti-War Leftists were organizing the support of Ron Paul people to protest with them.

It seems Ron Paul is content to receive support from the most America-hating groups out there – and as such, he is nothing more than a Liberal Wolf in sheep’s clothing for the sole purpose of obtaining high office.

It’s either that – or Ron Paul is just plain insane and nuts as the Mainstream Libertarian Caucus’ Eric Dondero says he is.

Why the Ron Paul Campaign is Dangerous

Written by JB Williams

©2007 USA

I am fast becoming the most unpopular man in America, among Ron Paul supporters that is. Truth is seldom popular among those at odds with that truth.

Paul supporters have worked diligently to convince voters that their candidate is the “real deal” constitutionalist conservative in the ’08 presidential race and that he has a real chance of winning. But the facts simply don’t support either of these claims and pointing this reality out seems to drive Paul supporters into a fit of unbridled rage.

The fact is, though Ron Paul himself is no threat to anyone or anything, his campaign is on a track that is very dangerous for America and the conservative movement in particular. Although he is highly unlikely to win anything, his campaign is increasingly likely to cause real trouble for the legitimate Republican nomination process…

…But the recent surge in [Ron Paul] campaign contributions did raise a more important question.

Where’s all that money coming from?

At first, I assumed, and had even written, that Ron Paul’s financial support was coming from the Libertarian wing of the Republican Party. Then I was corrected by former Ron Paul aide and founder of the Libertarian Republican Caucus, Eric Dondero, who also founded MainstreamLibertarian.com and hosts blogtalk radio show Libertarian Politics Live.

In an interview with Dondero, he emphatically complained; “Please refrain in the future from using the label “Libertarian Republican” in describing Ron Paul. Call him what he is: Some sort of populist leftwinger.”

Dondero continued, “Since 9/11 Paul has become a complete nutcase conspiratorialist quasi-Anti-Semitic leftwing American-hating nutball.”

These were strong words from a former aide to Mr. Paul (from 1997 – 2003) and words worthy of investigation in my mind. So I decided to investigate, which in politics always means, follow the money.

Where is all that money coming from?

Upon investigation, it appears that Mr. Dondero is exactly right. Much of Ron Paul’s money is not coming from mainstream Libertarians or Republicans.

Although he is running as a Republican, he actually has very little support from rank and file Republicans, as every national Republican poll confirms. But it turns out that he has very little support from mainstream Libertarians either. As Dondero pointed out, “Ron Paul is only attracting support from the leftwing side of the libertarian spectrum, virtually none of whom are Republicans.”

According to official campaign fund raising filings posted at http://www.opensecrets.org, Ron Paul’s top contributor is well known internet giant Google. Google, with Al Gore on the board of directors, has a long history of progressive political activism, both in the way they censor search results to bury conservative slanted stories, and in their campaign contribution habits, which is solidly Democrat, with the exception of Ron Paul.

Like Howard Dean before him, Ron Paul first grabbed headlines with his very hi-tech internet campaign, which is now easily explained by the fact that his largest constituency is in the computer tech community. It also explains how Paul supporters have perfected the art of “spamming” or “jamming” online polls, creating a false impression of bigger support while invalidating poll after poll. Other tech giants like Microsoft and Verizon top his donors list as well.

Among Ron Paul’s top donor zip codes are of course parts of Texas, but also heavily liberal districts in Chicago (60614), San Francisco (94117), more than 80% of which supports Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer, and Los Angeles – Long Beach, which is his second largest donor area after Dallas.

What we have here is a candidate trying to win the Republican nomination by raising money from liberals across the political aisle.

This is why his fund-raising is not translating to improved poll positions

His donors are not Republicans. So no matter how much money he raises, it is not translating into Republican support in the polls. He remains at or below 5% support in every national Republican poll, no matter how much money he raises….Yet his supporters still claim he is much more popular than the national polls indicate and that he will be the come from behind shocker at the Republican convention. How?

Here’s where the Ron Paul campaign becomes dangerous

Because Paul supporters know that support coming from non-Republicans is not reflected in the Republican polls, they have started a campaign to promote party-jumping so that their anti-war supporter’s from the left can vote in the Republican primary.

Twenty four states have “open” primaries, which means, one need not be Republican to vote in those Republican primaries. Ron Paul supporters are promoting both strategies – one in which Democrats, Independents, and members of other third parties can vote for him in “open” primaries where possible, and switch parties to vote for him where the primaries are “closed.”

The mere notion that a Republican presidential candidate should be nominated by this strategy is insane and very dangerous to the entire election process. At a minimum, it is a demonstration of just what kind of people are behind the Ron Paul campaign, obviously, not constitutionally conscious people. I do not know if the Paul campaign itself is behind this effort. But I am sure that the campaign is aware of this effort, as well as the fact that much of their funding is coming from people other than Republicans.

The Daily Paul is openly promoting Change Party Affiliation to Republican to Participate in Primaries. “As you may realize, there are many people from across the spectrum planning to support Ron Paul: Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Green Party members, disenfranchised Democrats, and of course the disenfranchised Republicans. Many of these people may not realize that they NEED to change party affiliations to Republican to vote in the GOP Primary in many States.” (A direct quote from the site)

So, how Republican is Republican candidate Ron Paul?

If he’s funded largely by anti-war leftists, from Democrat stronghold districts and counting on Democrats, Libertarians and members of the Green Party to win the Republican nomination, not very…

The only Republicans we find in his campaign are those myopic small government conservatives angry with Bush for his Democrat-like spending habits. Those so angry with Bush, that they are willing to overlook all of this just to vote for a candidate who promises less spending. Of course, we can’t entirely overlook the handful of moderate Republicans who oppose the war in Iraq either, few as they are.

Why is the Ron Paul campaign dangerous?

Despite his very real popularity across the political aisle, he is not likely to get enough people to switch parties in order to win the RNC nomination. But he is doing a great job of validating the perspective of all the negative propaganda uttered by leftists against Bush, Republicans, the War on Terror and national security. That’s not good.

He is also doing a great job of helping the left undermine the war on terror and that’s why he’s so popular among anti-war leftists, including in the press. This is bad.

……Paul and his supporters are busy carving up the party for their own anti-Republican agenda.

….I actually agree with many of Ron Paul’s positions, outside of his suicidal national security perspective of course. But I can not agree with the campaign tactics of using leftist money and votes to hijack the Republican nomination and I’m shocked that any Republican would.

There’s really no need to write another word about Ron Paul. If you can know all of these facts, follow the money and the links provided for their campaign tactics and still support him, you’re no Republican, much less a conservative or constitutionalist.

…That’s it! These are the facts. You don’t have to like them, you just need to know them.

130 Comments

Filed under Politics

130 responses to “Ron Paul – “A Complete Nutcase Conspiratorialist Quasi-Anti-Semitic Leftwing American-Hating Nutball.”

  1. imp

    You claim you are a christian. But Jesus said, “Turn the other cheek, forgive seven times seventy, give the shirt off your back, let he who is without sin cast the first stone, judge not lest you be judged, do not call your brother a fool.”

    Thanks for helping me show the world what violent, murderous, self-righteous hypocrites christians really are.

  2. FZappa

    Ron Paul’s going to win the presidency because the American people are sick and tired of the corrupt system that’s spent us into $9 trillion of debt and endless, pointless wars.

  3. crackerjaxon

    What a great attempt at alarmist nonsense. No facts, just purple prose. You are to be congratulated, sir.

  4. invar

    Nice try – but like Satan – who told Eve “you shall surely NOT die, you take truth and twist it – just enough to set the decieved on down the path to death.

    “Turn the other Cheek” has to be one of the most abused, misquoted and improperly applied statement of Jesus’ in American history.

    Jihadists are not slapping us in a courtroom – chastising us for our faith.

    They are lopping off our heads and blowing up women and children. When we start sawing off heads with a dull steak knife in honor of Jesus – your silly and ridiculous charge will have merit.

    Like Ron Paul – you are obviously an apologist for Jihadists.

    If you want to grovel at the feet of those who are set on destroying the temple of God’s Spirit in you – feel free to sacrifice yourself. Just don’t consign the rest of us to death because you have no common sense or courage to do anything but beg for your life.

    You are certainly free to go and kiss the hands of those intent on converting and killing you. I doubt you will make many disciples.

  5. invar

    What a great attempt at alarmist nonsense. No facts, just purple prose. You are to be congratulated, sir.

    Care to rebut anything JB actually says in his article – or like the good Liberal Leftists, will you just resort to poo-poohing it out-of-hand and call it nonsense?

    Of course you will.

    It’s what moveOn.org people do.

    No substance – only emoting jibberish.

  6. On Right Side of History

    Your article – especially the picture – is a compliment. The truth hurts! And the light of freedom and liberty cannot be hidden from view.

    “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” – Mahatma Gandhi

  7. invar

    The truth hurts eh?

    Well if the “truth” is that America sucks, is to be blamed for everything from global warming to orchestrating 9-11 – then your truth doesn’t hurt – it’s just damn INSULTING.

    Really – when Osama Bin Laden and Ahmadinejad quote your wannabe messiah’s anti-war rhetoric verbatim – that’s not liberty and freedom you are shining – it’s treason.

    But if you see blogs like this post as complimentary, why is it then you Ron Paul people beset every negative blog and thread about your wannabe messiah like a pack of jackals complete with a gnashing of teeth?

    You never answer any of the questions and problems we raise about Ron Paul – it’s always the same sidestepping rhetoric with no substance.

    Is Paul supported by movOn.org activists and money or isn’t he?

    Does he utter the same Blame America First garbage the Left does or doesn’t he?

    Did former Ron Paul Aide Eric Dondero call Ron Paul “a complete nutcase conspiratorialist quasi-Anti-Semitic leftwing American-hating nutball.” or didn’t he?

    WHY does he call Ron Paul those things?

    As usual with the emoting Left – many of you Paul People exhibit the same emoting insanity that they do.

    Making it perfectly clear to those of us who are informed about what’s at stake – that Ron Paul is as dangerous to our well being and survival as having Hildabeast at the helm.

  8. jasonomics

    A note about Dr. Paul’s campaign contributions:
    While it is true that based on his 3rd Quarter fundraising numbers Google employees do constitute the largest employer by percentage of his donors, this money actually accounts for slightly more than one half of one percent of his total fundraising in Q3. In fact, the top 20 employers of his donors only constitute slightly more than 4% of total donations.
    More interesting is that 32% of that 4% list the US Government (Army, Navy, Air Force, DOD, or Post Office) as their employer.
    Also interesting is two of the other top 20 employers are General Dynamics and Raytheon. These companies are defense contractors that stand to benefit from the War in Iraq continuing, due to increased spending on their products. So why do their employees support a candidate that would actually take action counter productive to their business model?
    Feel free to fact check this information yourself:
    http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00005906&cycle=2008

  9. crackerjaxon

    He doesn’t say anything. Just hurls insults and makes unfounded accusations. Yup, looks like a moveon article to me. The war on terror is a joke. It consists of harassing citizens at the airport. The war on drugs is a joke, it consists of invading people’s privacy and putting addicts in jail. You article is a joke, too. Is this a humor site?

  10. Perry W Munger IV

    Heh. What insecurity must possess you to insist that suggesting “America has done things in the past that have pissed off Arabs, which has caused them to attack us” is anti-American.

    I guess the sign of a ‘true conservative’ is ‘close-minded’ and ‘unwilling to discuss’, which, of course, to any enlightened mind, reads ‘idiot’ and ‘fool’.

    The truth is that the US has been extremely arrogant, to the point of attacking a sovereign nation for no good reason. Whether through intelligence failure or intentional ignorance, it has become clear Iraq had no WMD and posed no threat to the US nor its interests. It had no ties to Al Qaeda, indeed, being one of the few truly secular nations in the area.

    As for your Christianity, I am sure nothing will disabuse you of your erroneous reading of the bible, but if Jesus himself was not worth saving from the tyranny of the Jews and Romans, how can you stand and say your sorry carcass is worth more? Further, the quote about ‘turning the other cheek’ is only one of many. Jesus also to be ‘wise as serpents but harmless as doves’ or some such. Jesus clearly taught non-violence, chastising Peter for defending him. The early church also taught non-violence.

    The fact is that modern American protestantism is as far removed from apostolic christianity as middle-aged papal Rome. As a parting shot, to (mis)quote the words of Jesus, “truly, you have your reward’.

  11. NH_GOP

    Wow, is there no end to the filth that you will print?

    Follow WHAT money? There are no pacs, no lobbyists, no special interests, no money from ‘Al Gore’ to whom Paul is diametrically opposed especially on the global warming hoax. Are you claiming that Ron Paul believes in GLOBAL WARMING? He just told 450 students at UNH this weekend that he does NOT and never has. So there’s your theory blown right out of the water.

    Paul does not belong to nor aspire to ‘anti-war’ groups because as he told me, ‘they have another agenda.’
    He despises groups like MoveOn.org and no, they do NOT support him in any way shape or form.

    Most people in the Meetups are GOP like myself and all of us who were interviewed by the WP were GOP save for one who ‘used’ to be a Democrat years ago.

    Dondero is a kook who was fired — believes in using prostitutes, has questionable intelligence. This is just sour grapes from him, the article you cite, and you.

    Dondero’s been debunked everywhere on the net and including by the campaign. He has an IQ of about 80 so he might have said anything, but that doesn’t make it so. Funny, that. He calls Ron Paul those things because he’s mentally ill. Maybe he’s been seeing too many prostitutes.

    Ron Paul does not aspire to ‘inside job’ theories or ‘blame America first’ theories, so that is a total misrepresentation. So wrong again.

    Ron Paul is the only true conservative with a sane outlook and even the media knows it now. But there are some who, in a jealous rage, see the need to attack.

    And this blog is just another liberal hit piece that won’t stick…because none of the theories in the original piece of dirt were well-researched and thus do not have any basis in fact.

    When people donate, they have to put down who they work for. However, that doesn’t mean it’s a donation from a company, it’s from an individual as every single person who has donated so far.

    I guess that $4.3M in one day puts a little damper on your failed prediction of Oct 25th. Heh. Ron Paul is the only person who can defeat Hillary which is why the left (YOU) are out to smear him.

    I can picture your ‘type’ now: you are likely from the deep south, and you wear a white hood when not at your day job…and aspire to socialism.

    Sorry buddy, there is no free lunch.

  12. crackerjaxon

    Noooooooo….. hes not from the South. We believe in Christian principles and individual liberty in the South. Sorry, you yankees will have to claim him. What a revolting thing to say.

  13. “America First Isolationism and stupidity in the face of Jihadists”

    Yep, If Ron Paul gets his way there won’t be any war with Iran. You can’t under estimate those Persians. Just because they have a GDP smaller than Finland and their entire military budget is less than 4 billion anually, well… The stupidity comes from Neocon’s whose answer to terrorism was to defund Interpol, invade Afghanistan and Iraq, prop up a military dictator in Pakistan with 11 billion dollars and bankroll a tyrant in Eqypt with a couple more billion. The reason Ron Paul is getting all this attention is the American people are waking up to the Neocons running amok.

  14. Liz

    I find your brand of “Christianity” (if you can call it that) highly offensive and thus irrelevant. Anyone who could write such an article is suspect from the beginning. You write without fact (I am proof of that) and just spew venom for venom’s sake. This is the worst that I’ve read to date and that is saying alot. If you really want to know about Ron Paul go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com and if you want to know the real supporters visit your local meetup group. I hate yellow journalism!

  15. NH_GOP

    $8M and counting… and an even bigger day on 12/16

    http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

    No this guy is definitely from the south. If he’s against world gov’t, then he should be FOR PAUL.

    There is no parallel to the ‘M.O.’ he claims…no one is creating a crisis, you can’t call someone isolationist and then say he’s alarming everyone into doing anything. He’s asking us to do NOTHING. He’s preaching freedom and peace, so that goes completely against all the imagery crap he’s posted down below.

    This is am immature simple soul. Let him have his fun. It’s no matter.

  16. dpc

    Oh – that is rubbish.

  17. Rich

    This site isn’t worth the pixels it consumes. Get ready for Revolution, which side of history in the making will you choose? You and your lies will not stop it. It is far too powerful. You are an insignificant opposition to the message of Liberty, you sir, are the tyranical manure of which our forefathers spoke.

  18. Allen

    Invar,

    You asked for refutation:

    “Ron Paul’s top contributor is well known internet giant Google.” –LIE

    “Other tech giants like Microsoft and Verizon top his donors list as well.” –LIE

    Tsk, tsk, tsk.

    -0-

  19. John Howard

    How to Whip This Ron Paul Character and All His Wacky Followers.

    Ron Paul can be defeated by ignorance. Ignore him if you can.
    By lies. Misrepresent his positions whenever possible.
    By word gaming. As Lenin advised, “First, confuse the vocabulary.”
    By contempt. Dismiss him as amusing and pathetic.
    By smearing his supporters. Find the worst and spotlight them. Call them a cult.
    By consensus. Dismiss him with peer-pressure ridicule.
    By false accusations. Spread them quickly and far.
    By never discussing his policies. Change the subject to his person.
    By the polls. Ask the right people the right questions and get the answer you want.
    By reporting his most unpopular votes. But don’t report his reasoning.
    By rudeness. Wreck any debate where his ideas are winning.
    With all these tools, he can be easily defeated. Use them generously.
    But Ron Paul cannot be defeated by refuting him in an honest and courteous technical debate. Avoid that.

    – Moderno Machiavelli

  20. Wow, what a friendly, rational conversation…🙂

    Anyway, just wanted to weigh in and say I am a longtime conservative and I support Ron Paul. It is weird that so many conservatives assume that Ron Paul is “lefty” because he is against this war.

    He has been praised highly by such famous Republicans as Barry Goldwater, Ronald Regan, Milton Friedman, Bob Novak, etc.

    He’s got a better record on taxes and spending than any other member of either party, so why all the hateful talk about him being “leftwing” etc.?

    Anyway, cheers.

    -Chad

  21. JB Williams is an ignorant spammer. I’m glad there is finally a place that allows comments so this can be pointed out. He spammed my mailbox with pro-war proganda over and over, and has started many blogs all with the intent of smashing Ron Paul.

    He does what the Ron Paul crowd is accused of. Even more mind boggling is he does it while accusing others of doing it. Not surprising for those of us who have been watching for awhile.

    But I must thank them. Because they couldn’t be more transparent. The internet is not Fox News. It’s the old saying of when you point the finger, there are 3 pointing back at you.

  22. invar

    Heh. What insecurity must possess you to insist that suggesting “America has done things in the past that have pissed off Arabs, which has caused them to attack us” is anti-American.

    First of all, it showcases absolute ignorance of the Muslim/Arab mindset.

    Second, when you spend all your time denouncing America as vociferously as moveOn.org and Code Pinkos do – and it sounds strikingly identical to what Bin Laden, Nasarella and Ahmadinejad say – then yes, I call it anti-American.

    I guess the sign of a ‘true conservative’ is ‘close-minded’ and ‘unwilling to discuss’, which, of course, to any enlightened mind, reads ‘idiot’ and ‘fool’.

    Don’t even try it. A huge chunk of the Ron Paul brigades are not willing to “discuss” anything but insist how much of a messiah Ron Paul will be to deliver the nation from evil “neocons”.

    To the point that his rabid supporters on some boards suggest that anyone who votes for anyone but Ron Paul should be considered traitors to the Constitution and shot.

    Yeah…”enlightened” tyrants is more like it.

    The truth is that the US has been extremely arrogant, to the point of attacking a sovereign nation for no good reason.

    Thanks for once again bloviating the moveOn.org – DNC talking points. We had 12 years. 17 Resolutions. 1 violated U.S. Cease Fire and a Jihad declared on Americans.

    “No good reason”.

    As for your Christianity….

    It is decidedly not anything like what passes for the feel-good emotional pablum of today’s Christianity that has sat idle while our culture goes right down the poop hole.

    So rest assured and self-confident. Your brand of Churchianity is what makes up the vast majority in the States. I’m a tiny grain-of-sand anomoly in comparison.

    Jesus also to be ‘wise as serpents but harmless as doves’ or some such.

    I’m glad our Founders did not erroneously apply that misapplication of scripture to their set of circumstances. We would still be British Subjects today.

    Jesus clearly taught non-violence, chastising Peter for defending him. The early church also taught non-violence.

    By that reckoning, America should not exist. Christianity should not exist. Might wish to look up the Battle of Tours for starters.

    Jesus and the Father are One. God on more than one occassion told His People in Israel to not only go to war against those who were a thorn in their side – but to annihilate them completely.

    Jesus is going to come and wipe out 200 million soldiers gathered to fight him at the End of the Age. The truth you people refuse to understand is: peace only comes through the other side of war.

    But I guess history is just a “neocon” conspiracy, eh?

    Paul does not belong to nor aspire to ‘anti-war’ groups because as he told me, ‘they have another agenda.’
    He despises groups like MoveOn.org and no, they do NOT support him in any way shape or form.

    That makes you either grossly uninformed or a liar. Go and read some of the posts at Democrat Underground. Not only do they sound like what Ron Paul says regarding the war and non-interventionism, they WANT Paul to be squared against Hillary.

    Ron Paul does not aspire to ‘inside job’ theories or ‘blame America first’ theories, so that is a total misrepresentation. So wrong again.

    Okay – I think this just makes you a plain spinmeister (other word for liar) for Mr. Paul.

    Here’s Mr. Paul’s own Blame America First words:

    “When I discussed the blowback that came from us intervening on the Arabian peninsula, Chris Wallace asked me if I wanted to follow the marching orders of al-Qaeda. I responded that I wanted to follow the marching orders of the Constitution, and not wage undeclared, aggressive wars that cause us only trouble.”

    Mr. Paul was addressing the issue of 9-11 with the question – and blamed everything from the Iranian Hostage crisis to 9-11 on the fact that America is “Over there” – meaning we BUY their stinking oil and do what we can to keep it flowing at market prices.

    Mr. Paul is just another voice of the Blame America First mentality, and you NH – are simply a Paulie stooge, and a good disinfo smearmonger.

    I find your brand of “Christianity” (if you can call it that) highly offensive and thus irrelevant.

    Well Liz, I stand in good company.

    Anyone who could write such an article is suspect from the beginning.

    I did not write the article, I posted it from the link provided.

    You write without fact (I am proof of that) and just spew venom for venom’s sake.

    Yeah, I know…anyone who opposes your messiah is “venomous”, “tyrannical manure” that receives death threats for exercising free political speech.

    So who are the tyrants exactly??

    So far, based on the fruits – the Ron Paul Supporters are running right behind the Stalinists on the Left in my experience.

    If you really want to know about Ron Paul go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com

    Been there.

    I disagree with his stated positions on foreign policy, this war Jihadists are waging and his plan to inpose a “non-interventionist” policy.

    The last two debates showcased to me that he is a raving lunatic that has “neocon” on the brain as much as the moveOn.org DNC bunch does.

    That makes them defacto allies in my book.

    Too bad if you do not like my opinions, or my Christianity.

    I’m not running for office, or a popularity contest.

  23. As Christians, we are called to live with Christ as our example. Your article is nothing but hate filled, baseless, rude and arrogant false witness. I pray that your readership doesn’t think that’s how Christ would act.

  24. invar

    Thanks Bryan, for again illustrating my contention, that if a majority of American Christians were present during Mark 11:15-16, Matthew 23:13-15, they too would charge Jesus with being a hate-filled baseless, rude and arrogant false witness.

    America has made Christ into a bleeding heart pansy that has nothing but soft-spoken niceties to say about all things.

    No wonder prayer is banned, God is being tossed out of the culture and homosexuals are on the verge of marriage as an institution.

    America is going to be butter for the Caliphate to trounce given this level of wimpishness disguised as a faith.

    BTW – as I said before, outside of my commentary – the article is from JB Williams.

  25. invar

    Get ready for Revolution, which side of history in the making will you choose?

    Will you follow with death threats for not supporting your messiah like some of your comrades have already done?

    You and your lies will not stop it. It is far too powerful.

    That’s funny. Mamoud Ahmadinejad just said the same thing about Islam conquering the globe the week before last.

    You are an insignificant opposition to the message of Liberty, you sir, are the tyranical manure of which our forefathers spoke.

    There it is! Albeit much more subtle than the usual threats.

    I will eagerly await your attempt to water your messianic tree of King Paul with my blood.

    Considering your messiah says the same things Al Qaeda and Iran have to say about their justifications to war on America – I know how to view you people.

  26. Craig

    The information in this article is factually incorrect, and easily refuted.

    RonPaul2008.com has been posting all donations as they come in during the 4th quarter. Go to http://www.ronpaulgraphs.com and click on Donor Maps.

    Ron Paul’s strongest support comes from the Mountain West.

    And New Hampshire….

  27. d jahn

    The absence of documentation to support your absurd assertions that Ron Paul is being funded by the left and doesn’t appeal to Republicans and Libertarians is noteworthy. The republican party has been well represented at the meetings I have attended. Many of them represent the drove that have left the party over the past 8 years disheartened by continued governmental growth and spending under republican rule. It appears the republican party has moved to the left, leaving Ron Paul all alone on the right. Many folks see that.

    The troops seem to like him too. Are you calling them a bunch of leftist as well?

    You really need to get out more.

  28. Dave

    You must be a dupe for Guiliani and his psycho followers like, Bernie Kerik, Pat Robertson, and Trokyites like Noman Podhertz, William Kristol, and others.
    This stuff would be hillarious if you had a sense of humor, but is only sad.

  29. paul revere II

    Oh? Ron Paul is raising Money from others than the Hannity clone base.. whaaa, whaaa

    You sound like a baby Neo Con. whaa whaa don’t take away my war on terror whaa whaa…..

    Your Insane Mr Williams- Sorry, we don’t want endless War a bankrupt Nation. Sorry, If you think It OK or was just invevitable that we had to give our Manufacturing base to the Communist Chinese and now they build a military against us and are shadowing our Navy and shooting Satelites out of Orbit! Your a BAFFOON……OR just Antoher Criminal with ties to the NeoCon Agenda.

    Your wrong also- there are many REP in his campaign! Lots of Consitutional ones…

    I think that Neo Cons should be rounded up like Nazis… You’ve brought our Country to the brink of Disaster!- and you did it with stolen elections…….

    Do you purposely over look the FACT the Iraq and Iran are lies!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

    Not a small matter Sir!

    Do you overlook the fact that Ron Paul gets more Money from the military in Iraq than any onther Canidate…. Are ya gunna Cage there Votes again!!

    All Neo Cons, Fox news, Hannity, Bill O ,Rush Ruppert [EDITED Profanity] – You Can all go to hell we are taking over the Republican party and many Neo Cons will be lucky if they don’t go too jail….

    How can you say We are Crazy when Everthing the Neo Cons stand for and did are crazy?- And Evil truley Evil…..

    Wake up! Being against the War dosen’t mean your not Conservative…… How [EDITED Profanity] up are you?

    So go to hell your in the Minority now anyways the “True” Republicans as you call them are a small minority now and will soon turn out to be a shameful memory of years ago….

    You see THERE IS NO WAY ANYBODY ELSE CAN BEAT HILLARY BUT RON PAUL-PERIOD!

    70-80 OF ALL AMERICANS WANT OUT NOW!

    So your insane- truley insane, You need to start reading history books…..

    Paul RevereII NH- First in the Primarys….

  30. invar

    djahn,

    As I stated earlier, I did not write the JB Williams article – I merely linked to it and posted excerpts.

    Whether RPs funding is as Mr. Williams attributes would not be surprising to me due the FACT that I know many, many hardcore Leftists and those on DNC forums and blogs I peruse that SUPPORT Ron Paul’s anti-war positions and are rallying their ideologues to support RP in the primary to go up against Hillary.

    RP is no Conservative – he is a Libertarian, tried and true, and while the GOP is become Democrat Lite, I refuse to support RP on the fundamental issue of foreign policy and national security.

    I know plenty of troops in the 101 and 82nd, countless Guard Units in Theatre and on leave including my own nephew who put RP in the same boat they toss Pelosi, Reid, Durbin and Murtha.

  31. invar

    You must be a dupe for Guiliani and his psycho followers like, Bernie Kerik, Pat Robertson, and Trokyites like Noman Podhertz, William Kristol, and others.

    You would be wrong. I will not vote for Guiliani and I do not support the host of Northeastern Liberal Politicos. Right now, I have no preference for Prez – they are all disappointing or downright frightening.

    All I know for certain is that Ron Paul, Guilianni or anyone from the DNC or Socialist Parties is not getting my vote – and I will campaign as if I was at war against them obtaining the WH.

    You sound like a baby Neo Con. whaa whaa don’t take away my war on terror whaa whaa

    Ahhh yes. The typical Ron Paul Moonbat Supporter emerges to toss out the anti-semetic MoveOn.org talking points and tirades.

    “Neocon, neocon, neocon, neocon…blah, blah, blah….”

    Like I said – straight from the same bowels of the MoveOn.org Code Pinko Leftist brigades of Socialists and other Hate America, Bash Conservative wing of the political spectrum.

    I think that Neo Cons should be rounded up like Nazis… You’ve brought our Country to the brink of Disaster!- and you did it with stolen elections…….

    You forgot to say that after you round us up in boxcars for camps, we should all be shot as traitors and our children forced to eat our carcasses before they are all shot too.

    Or are you a different Ron Paul supporter than the one who e-mailed that suggestion to me a week or so ago?

    Thanks Mr. NotRevere – for illustrating to everyone what the typical Ron Paul supporter that I encounter is really like.

    Punks who threaten and worse.

    Will the Primary be your messiah’s Beer Hall Putsch??

    Looks like it to me.

  32. Oh Gosh here it goes again. Ron Paul supporters who visit here go triple your donation to Paul.

  33. You sir,

    Are a waste of bandwith.

  34. d jahn

    Not all of Ron Paul’s positions are in line with Libertarians. In fact, I know some who oppose Ron Paul and argue that Guiliani is more libertarian. I don’t see that. I do see that Ron Paul appeals to a broad base that certainly includes some of those on the left, but the larger base wants to see a change in our foreign policies, a reduction in the size and scope of government, lower taxes, a sound currency and a pro life president. Those were traditional republican values prior to 2000. That no longer appears to be the case.

    Bush and a republican congress expanded government and plunged this nation further into debt. Then they set about on a perpetual war for perpetual peace that will always elude this nation if we don’t change our ways.

    All I can tell you is that your perception of things is not consistent with my observations and first hand knowledge of this campaign. You are using a broad brush that just doesn’t fit.

    You can find the truth if you seek it, or you can continue to spread disinformation.

  35. invar

    You sir,

    Are a waste of bandwith.

    Likewise I’m sure.

    It is amazing to experience the same insane vitriol and death-threat-foaming-at-the-mouth spew from Ron Paul People that you get from the Democrat Underground and MoveOn.org bloggers when taking their darlings to task.

    In fact, it’s downright eerie.

    Because it’s the same folks – and/or the same spirit of insanity motivating them: get their messiah into power to “save” the people.

    No wonder all republics fall into dictatorships by the clamour of the people.

    They get nutcases like Hillary and Ron Paul whipping them into notions of salvation.

  36. invar

    djahn,

    Finally, a reasonable person.

    I do see that Ron Paul appeals to a broad base that certainly includes some of those on the left, but the larger base wants to see a change in our foreign policies, a reduction in the size and scope of government, lower taxes, a sound currency and a pro life president.

    The Left and the neoLeft support Ron Paul’s run for two reasons: they want him opposite Hillary in the General Election because it takes the one issue she is weak on, off the debate table and pits the issue of pure Socialism and government takeover of everything from healthcare to big oil – against the domestic Constitutional issues Ron Paul barks about.

    On that score – Begala, Carville and the Clinton Crime family see it as a landslide win for Hillary as urban welfare statists go up against – a “cut-it-all-down” Constitutionalist – and they are already prepping the battlefield to scare everyone to death that Ron Paul will gut welfare, SocSec bennies and most govt. programs for the “poor and disenfranchised”.

    Ron Paul stands no chance to get his platform over a welfare state urban elite, because the Clinton machine understands that most Americans are totally ignorant about the Constitution – and know most of them give a rat’s ass about it – until it invades their privacy or right to do what they want.

    Those were traditional republican values prior to 2000. That no longer appears to be the case.

    Unfortunately no. The Bluebloods want the GOP to dump Conservatives – and expand the government Corporate Welfare State on par with the Socialist welfare state.

    Bush and a republican congress expanded government and plunged this nation further into debt.

    True – but you folks keep forgetting that Congress controls the purse strings.

    Bush cannot spend jack crap without Congress – and last I looked – the party split was hair-breadth narrow with enough liberals in the GOP to swing to whatever the Democrats wanted to do.

    Then they set about on a perpetual war for perpetual peace that will always elude this nation if we don’t change our ways.

    You just don’t get it.

    We’ve had literally DOZENS of attacks on Americans for 3 decades plus by this rising beast of Islam.

    Perpetual assymetric war is upon us whether we want war or not – until we are destroyed or subjugated. Stop listening to Ron Paul and the Code Pinkos and listen to what our enemies are saying and doing.

    Churchill went through the same crap – no one listened to what he was warning everyone about Hitler either. Instead of risking a few thousand lives to stop what he saw as a beast rising out of Germany when the cost was managable – they waited, until they were on the verge of being conquered – and it took MILLIONS of lives to set right.

    Ron Paul is clueless about such wisdom given his positions on foreign policy in a very real and hostile world.

    All I can tell you is that your perception of things is not consistent with my observations and first hand knowledge of this campaign.

    My knowledge is based on what interaction I receive from Ron Paul supporters on forums and blogs first hand. Your observations are skewed to the colored glasses you are wearing.

    My observations are in light of what Ron Paul has written, has said in debates and online interviews and from his web site, and what his myriad support base has to say and how they behave.

    I have to state that I have yet to get a death threat from a Hillary supporter, but I’ve had several from purported Ron Paul people.

    Aside form his positions I oppose, the company Ron Paul attracts are people I want nothing to do with.

    You can find the truth if you seek it, or you can continue to spread disinformation.

    I will continue to post my opinions, whether anyone likes them or not. You can call it what you like.

    But rest assured I will be calling things what they are in my estimation.

  37. rhys

    What is the differnece between a Conservative and a Libertarian?

    “If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”

    “Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.” -Ronald Reagan, 1975

    Turning the other cheek isn’t only done out of forgiveness. It is also done out of indifference. Terrorists may bomb us, but they are irrelevant. I don’t feel terrorized, because I am not a coward. I walk through the valley of the shadow of death and fear no evil. Why should we spend ourselves to the poor house for a few terrorist bombings? They are weak, not us.

  38. invar

    Turning the other cheek isn’t only done out of forgiveness. It is also done out of indifference. Terrorists may bomb us, but they are irrelevant.

    To indifferent people like yourself who probably didn’t lose any loved ones on 9-11 like some of us did.

    I don’t feel terrorized, because I am not a coward.

    No, you don’t feel terrorized because you refuse to see the threat, outside of perhaps your own countrymen. They get more vitriol than the Jihadists do with Ron Paul and MoveOn.org/Code Pinkos.

    Why should we spend ourselves to the poor house for a few terrorist bombings? They are weak, not us.

    That’s rich…ly ignorant. The idea behind the bombings and flying planes into buildings was to send us to the poor house by destroying our economy, making us easier to destroy.

    Like I said – you people need to consider what our enemies are saying they are going to do to us. You might think they are weak – you have a very big surprise coming.

    They are serious about world conquest – our politicians are only serious about obtaining power for themselves.

  39. Brian

    Wow! This article just inspired me to make another donation to the Paul campaign.

    Interpret the information on Paul any way you like. As an individual i’ve voted Republican in the past but in the last few years would never have considered it except for Paul. A few weeks ago I re-registered Republican to vote in the primaries.
    I’ve voted in all those polls that he won and have no idea how to ‘spam’ or ‘jam’. I’ve donated twice already, will be donating again today on your behalf and I am most certainly not a member of the ‘left’

    Please write more like this. It gets us really fired up!

  40. EasyE

    Why don’t we count up the number of regimes that the US has supported that are now turned against us. Iraq, Iran, Afgahnistan, Pakistan, Cuba. I think that there is something wrong with our foreign policy. How much money do we have to steal from the American public before the realization that messing with the world only messes up America?

    Dr. Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist just like the founding fathers. Would you call them isolationists? Isolationists don’t support free trade and communication with all nations, Dr. Paul does.

    If Iraq is so important to you, I’ll ask at what point do we leave? If we leave after they setup a government then it may still be toppled by a jihadist regime. Or do we simply continue to support the country and the rest of the world at the expense of the American taxpayer and soldier. How many years do we have to stay there?

    You are promoting a policy of liberalism abroad. It is nothing more than welfare for the rest of the world. That is the only difference between republicans and democrats today, it’s who they want to support and wether it is with taxes or deficits. Either way we will be broke and Dr. Paul doesn’t support either form of liberalism.

    I am a lifelong conservative Republican and I nor any of my conservative friends are stupid enough to believe that spending all of our money over seas pitting one faction against the other until they both hate us is going to make any of us safer.

    I am sorry if you don’t realize how liberal this warfare and welfare policy is, but a true conservative wouldn’t want to spend my money until I was so poor that I had no place to turn except the government that made me that way.

    Life, Liberty and Property. If we are to realize that here in this country then we must let other nations be free to choose their own destiny. Please don’t twist my words either, because I don’t mean sit back and be attacked. But as of now we have no real threats other than within our own borders. Maybe you should go back and read some of the writings of Washington, Jefferson, Paine, Franklin, Lincoln and others so that you might heed the warnings that they have given about the trap you are falling into.

  41. Rob

    Oh. So that means that Mr. Paul is no different then all of the other candidates ? I’ll take my chances with Mr. Paul. At least he’s honest about what’s wrong, and is not being a pansy flip-flopper, trying to suck up to the public to get votes. You think that he’ll actually fare worse than the clowns he’s running against ? Get a clue – if you think that Ron Paul is a ‘nut’ and the other candiates aren’t, then YOU are the ‘nut’ !!!!

  42. Jay D

    Please, please, do not upset our two-party applecart!

    My favorite line is:
    “The mere notion that a Republican presidential candidate should be nominated by this strategy is insane and very dangerous to the entire election process. At a minimum, it is a demonstration of just what kind of people are behind the Ron Paul campaign, obviously, not constitutionally conscious people.”

    The two-party system with its nominating processes are wholly extra-constitutional. There is nothing sacred about it. It is just the obstacle that has to be dealt with if you happen to be reason outside the two-party echo chamber.

    Funny. Michael Medved says “Don’t run third party, run within the two party system instead.”

  43. invar

    Why don’t we count up the number of regimes that the US has supported that are now turned against us. Iraq, Iran, Afgahnistan, Pakistan, Cuba.

    Don’t forget to add Venezuela, France, Germany, Spain, and the host of old Europe that we rebuilt after the WWII.

    I think that there is something wrong with our foreign policy.

    Yes, obviously buying oil and spending money in trade and rebuilding both our enemies and our allies is bad juju.

    Americans seem to have forgotten that we are an anomoly in human history – and that the world is a dangerous and hostile place that does not share our unique values and viewpoints.

    How much money do we have to steal from the American public before the realization that messing with the world only messes up America?

    Until the world comes knocking on our doorstep and kills Americans in the quest for global domination like it did in 1917, 1941 and 2001.

    This mantra of “mess in the world messes America” is just plain stupidity and gross ignorance of reality.

    Dr. Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist just like the founding fathers.

    Care to explain Jefferson’s use of the Marines on the Barabary Coast?

    Paul is worse than an Isolationist – his foreign policy ideas are dangerous and stupid.

    If Iraq is so important to you, I’ll ask at what point do we leave?

    If it were up to me, when the nests of Jihadist Islam is utterly destroyed and Muslims quake in fear at even the thought of hostility directed at any American or America. They can benefit from a great freindship if they choose to.

    Or do we simply continue to support the country and the rest of the world at the expense of the American taxpayer and soldier. How many years do we have to stay there?

    We can nuke them into obliteration or conquer them and make their nations provinces of the U.S. and put up McDonalds and Walmarts everywhere.

    America has no stomoach for that – and given what we did post WWII with the Marshall Plan – we’ve seen and reaped the success of such a policy.

    Given how many trillions we have wasted on a failed welfare state in America, I’m all for scrapping those hundreds of billions for national security.

    You are promoting a policy of liberalism abroad.

    I’m sure that’s how you see the Marshall Plan. Perhaps we should have just obliterated Germany from the map and left them in ruins?

    Either way we will be broke and Dr. Paul doesn’t support either form of liberalism.

    Good luck trying to turn off the welfare spigot here in the states. Be prepared for mass bloodshed from the dependent class.

    I nor any of my conservative friends are stupid enough to believe that spending all of our money over seas pitting one faction against the other until they both hate us is going to make any of us safer.

    News for you – most of our money is spent on domestic welfare bullsheit and pork for politicians and the Blame America First position you people hold is as absurd as anything the Democrat Underground spews forth.

    Life, Liberty and Property. If we are to realize that here in this country then we must let other nations be free to choose their own destiny.

    Do you people not listen to Islam’s leaders?

    Their stated destiny is to annihilate America and Israel and conquer the world for Allah.

    And you people think that we should let them choose that destiny? Somehow that’s moral and right?

    Were you people asleep on 9-11 or what?

    Your ideas are buffonery steeped in ignorance of reality. Life, Liberty and Property ARE NOT VALUES ISLAM BELIEVES IN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL.

    If you truly believe we have no real threats other than from fellow countrymen like me – then not only are you not paying attention to reality – you’ve bought into the very zeitgeist towards our destruction.

    Jefferson went to war on the Mohommadens if you recall your history BTW.

    Unlike you folks – he was paying attention to the threat they posed, and decided to do something beyond the “non-interventionist” policy you keep preaching.

  44. invar

    Oh. So that means that Mr. Paul is no different then all of the other candidates ?

    No – he’s screwier.

    I’m still not sure who is more dangerous as CINC – Hillary or RP.

    Hillary will ensure our subjugation to Socialists.

    RP will ensure our annihilation by Jihadists.

    They are just two people that will NEVER get my vote.

  45. Jay D

    “RP will ensure our annihilation by Jihadists.”

    lol

    annihilation. sure. How about a little perspective.

  46. EasyE

    Our biggest threat is the wasting of America’s wealth. We cannot afford to be the policeman of the world or support massive government here. Ron Paul is the only candidate proposing to stop both. If you’ve noticed the value of the dollar has suffered tremendously recently due to our lack of fiscal restraint and the policies of our corrupted federal reserve. Or are you oblivious to that as well. This is the reason Dr. Paul gives for getting into politics in the first place.

    Dr. Paul gave a speech in February of 2001 warning us of the results of our interventionism around the world and lo and behold the tragedy of 9/11 occurred. He was wise enough to see the road we are traveling down, why aren’t you?

    You can go on and try to perpetuate this policy of spending money but you must also realize that it will guarantee that the United States will soon no longer be in a position to continue it.

    A better path going forward would be to stop providing incentives for illegals to come into the country, making the border more manageable and alleviating the burden on the border patrol. And stop providing the incentive for terrorists to recruit radical fundamentalists. We would then have more resources to pursue the terrorist that pose a true threat to America, the ones that are here within our borders. No I don’t mean Americans, I mean Islamic terrorists. I’m not naive enough to think that they don’t exist, but I’m also not naive enough to believe the ones in Iraq are the threat.

  47. invar

    “How about a little perspective.”

    Here’s some “perspective” for you.

    Add a nuke to the equation above and do the math to get a “perspective” of what a Ron Paul Presidency guarantees.

  48. Jay D

    What do those videos have to do with Iraq or Iran?

    Ron Paul voted to go after those responsible for 9/11. It’s not his fault that effort got side-tracked.

    P.S. It was the US government that told airlines “Pilots can’t have guns.” and “Don’t resist hijackers.” The jihadists did their homework. Another well-intentioned government policy had unintended consequences.

  49. invar

    Dr. Paul gave a speech in February of 2001 warning us of the results of our interventionism around the world and lo and behold the tragedy of 9/11 occurred.

    Ron Paul operates from the absurd stupid idea that all problems we face are self-made, which is why I label him what he is: A Blame America Firster.

    There were warnings about the threat militant Islam was going to pose to us in the mid-1970’s. They were almost shouting about them to the Reagan Administration, and after the 1983 bombing of our Marines in Lebanon – Reagan did exactly what Ron Paul suggests we do today: run home.

    In the subsequent near 20 years – we have been routinely attacked and Americans killed with no retaliation whatsoever.

    That course of “non-Interventionism” is exactly what earned us 9-11.

    If you people would stop and study what the leaders of Jihadist Islam have to say – you would get a clear picture of what and why they are going to try and take us down.

    We are the only obstacle towards implementation of global Sharia Law. They cannot do it with us in the way. All lands are to be made Muslim – and ours is a Kuffar Nation – one that needs to be destroyed before the Mahdi (or Imam) can return to lead Islam to global conquest.

    He was wise enough to see the road we are traveling down, why aren’t you?

    RP is not wise when it comes to foreign policy. He is a fool, and as unhinged as the movOn.org bunch – spouting the same exact recipes.

    You can go on and try to perpetuate this policy of spending money but you must also realize that it will guarantee that the United States will soon no longer be in a position to continue it.

    When defense spending outpaces the Welfare State spending, we can talk.

    A better path going forward would be to stop providing incentives for illegals to come into the country

    Good luck convincing Democrats and Republican Liberals of that.

    What is RP’s plan outside of bitching about it?

    making the border more manageable and alleviating the burden on the border patrol.

    What the hell does that mean?

    How about sealing the damn border and putting milita on it?

    And stop providing the incentive for terrorists to recruit radical fundamentalists.

    Then you need to burn every copy of the Quran on the planet. THAT’s the incentive – coupled with Imam’s hell bent on global jihad.

    We would then have more resources to pursue the terrorist that pose a true threat to America, the ones that are here within our borders.

    How does RP plan to tackle the calls of “racism” for doing such a “profiling”??? Earning the rabid ire of the moveOn.org pinkos supporting him at the moment?

    I’m also not naive enough to believe the ones in Iraq are the threat.

    Iraq is nothing but a beach head in the war on Jihadist Islam.

    After Iran supplies Bin laden’s delivery boys with a nuke for a tramp steamer or a van coming up from South of the border – you’ll perhaps see the widsom of having a beach head in Iraq.

  50. invar

    What do those videos have to do with Iraq or Iran?

    How clueless do you people have to continually illustrate yourselves?

    Stop thinking like a stupid American stuck in the mindset of a WWII nation-state conflict.

    This is an assymetric RELIGIOUS WAR.

    Get it through your THICK SKULLS. Borders, nations and races mean NOTHING. Jihadists who have attacked and killed Americans are Saudi, Yemense, Egyptian, Lebanese, Iranian, Iraqi, Kuwaaiti, Indonesian, Libyan, Algerian….

    …They attack us because we are not Muslim and do not support Sharia, and we have power and might they think is rightfully theirs and do business and touch feet to Muslim lands.

    do you people get it yet?

    No of course not. Ron Paul is your messiah, and he speaks of blowback – so therefore – America is to blame, not Jihadists.

    This is a war with non-state actors in a non-state conflict. This is a war birthed in the minds of belief, not a country.

    Ron Paul voted to go after those responsible for 9/11.

    He did?

    Did he vote to declare war on Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Egypt?

    or as one Ron Paul supporter told me:

    “Those responsible for the attack on 9-11 are dead. So justice is already served”

    I do not think you get more idiotic than that.

    But I’ll guess that as the commentary goes on – we are going to see it right here from the Rabid Ronnies.

  51. Jay D

    “He did?”

    He did.

    Ron Paul voted for H.J. 64 “IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

  52. invar

    Let’s take a good look at the language here and discover something the anti-war nutballs deliberately overlook:

    That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001

    First off, the language says “he determines” – meaning the President. The president determines which entities planned, authorized, commited and aided the Jihadists.

    We know the Taliban in A’stan aided Al Qaeda.

    What about the Al Qaeda cells in Qatar, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere that had roles in the planning and execution of the attacks in 2000 and 2001?

    The cells were made up of nationals from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen and Lebanon.

    Should Bush use force on those nations? Saudi Arabia helped fund and finance part of the operation.

    or harbored such organizations or persons,

    The cells met in Hamburg Germany to initiate the training phase of the attacks.

    Should we punish Germany?

    Pakistan has militants that harbor both the Taliban and Al Qaeda. There’s the madrassas in Saudi Arabia and the Mid East that harbor Al Qaeda jihadists.

    The point is that this is an assymetric war – that goes beyond borders and nation-states.

    Ron Paul’s brain only operates on the wavelength of the 1700’s nation-state paradigm.

    Bin Laden has Ron Paul trounced with his ancient stance to an immovable mindset.

    in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

    Wow…to PREVENT ANY FUTURE ACTS.

    Isn’t that amazing language?

    So if the Prez decides to attack Iraq and Iran to prevent the kind of attacks on Americans that they promise to unleash – would that not fit the very language Ron Paul once agreed to but now like Hillary has changed his mind?

    Interesting.

    It’s all about surrender and appeasement though with the mindset that Ron Paul and the MovOn.Org/Code Pinkos share together.

  53. MuzzleBlast

    I see desperate people.

  54. Jay D

    “Wow…to PREVENT ANY FUTURE ACTS.

    Isn’t that amazing language?

    So if the Prez decides to attack Iraq and Iran to prevent the kind of attacks on Americans that they promise to unleash – would that not fit the very language Ron Paul once agreed to but now like Hillary has changed his mind?”

    The only amazing thing is how you pulled a small part of an already short resolution completely out of context.

    The resolution authorized the Prez to deal with those responsible for 9/11 in order to prevent future attacks. The resolution did not give authority for the Prez to attack any state that, by his judgment alone, could conceivably attack the US sometime in the future.

    Besides. Am I missing something? Did Iran or Iraq promise to attack the US? The Iranian prez was here a while back and I didn’t hear anything like that.

    In retrospect, I’m sure Ron Paul wishes the congress was a little more specific than it was, but who could have predicted Bush’s later actions when Bush ran on a humble foreign policy of no nation building?

  55. EasyE

    “Did he vote to declare war on Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Egypt?”

    Of course he didn’t because the neo-con movement that you love so much is busy supporting those states. We will have to wait until they turn against us, like Iraq and bin Laden have done, before we can declare war on them as well. Oh, I mean declare use of force, not war.

    When are you going to realize the massive expense of all that you want to do around the world is unaffordable, unwise, and is itself destroying America? Name one country or group of people since WWII that we are fighting or have fought where we did not at one time support monetarily or militarily or in which we didn’t instigate the fight?

    We supported Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in Iran. Then after the democratic election of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq, we supported a coup to reinstall the Shah. Most logical people conclude that this was the cause of the Iranian revolution. Lest we forget also the Iran-Contra affair. We supported Saddam Hussein through out the 80’s for his mutual dislike of the Iranians, we even helped him create biological weapons. But when Iraq went into Kuwait we decided, that with the soviet union dead, we could flex our muscle as a world power. Whatever beef the Iranians or Iraqis have with us comes entirely from our intervention in their affairs. It is that intervention that stirred up the fervent fundamentalist movement. Had we remained a neutral country in foreign affairs and worried only about our direct relationships and not the internal affairs of others, I believe we would be in a far more peaceful situation today. As it is, we cannot take back the past, but we can recognize our mistakes and begin a new foreign policy, perhaps a neo-good neighbor policy. We have far too much to worry about within our own borders to be concerned about the borders of the rest of the world. But you would prefer to spend us into oblivion and disaster.

    You keep saying “good luck” when it comes to Ron Paul and his domestic policies and trying to limit spending at home as well. I will just say that I would prefer to elect a conservative who fails at his attempt to reign in spending then to elect someone who will make no attempt at all. Besides telling everyone what they want to hear and not backing it up with reasoned positions, what alternatives do the other Republican candidates offer in terms of domestic policy besides deficit spending and your attitude of “good luck”? Deficits do matter, they will have to be repaid. Ron Paul has never voted for an unbalanced budget or a tax increase. Can the candidate you support claim that?

  56. EasyE

    http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001/cr092501.htm

    -Rep. Ron Paul September 25, 2001

    [speech is at link provided]

  57. invar

    Did Iran or Iraq promise to attack the US? The Iranian prez was here a while back and I didn’t hear anything like that.

    Because you don’t want to.

    Go to Memri.org.

    Watch some Arab, Palestinian and Iranian TV – get some transcripts of what Ahmadinejad has said in terms of burning American cities to the ground and how he promises that Islam will rule the world.

    EasyE – you go ahead and keep believing America is responsible for everything from the Iranian act of War in 1979 to Global Warming to bringing 9-11 on ourselves.

    In fact, since you like to keep going back in time to assign proofs of all the world’s woes on America, let’s get to the real root and understand that if we didn’t overthrow the legal, lawful authority of the crown of England, we would not have created the blowback that caused the war of 1812, the Spanish-American War, WWI and II on through present day Iraq.

    America is the land of neocons, and like the Jews of Europe, have ruined the world. (according to the Stormfront donators to the Ron Paul campaign).

    In fact, let’s not forget the blowback of the Indian Wars that created the same resentment of Americans that Jihadists share today.

    Clearly the problem is America’s existence. So the sooner you join forces with Osama Bin laden and Ahamdinejad, the sooner we can rid the world of the bane of humanity.

    Yes?

    “Calm deliberation in our effort to restore normalcy is crucial. Cries for dropping nuclear bombs on an enemy not yet identified cannot possibly help in achieving this goal.”

    – Ron Paul, President – the day after New York, Chicago and LA are vaporized by nuclear weapons.

    Yeah – I want THAT bozo for President.

    No thanks.

    Hillary would be tougher on foreign policy than Ron Paul.

  58. EasyE

    I never once claimed that America is to blame. It is the foreign policy of a few Americans that is to blame. I also never said anything about global warming. You are forgetting that I am a lifelong conservative. It is the conservative ideal of Ron Paul that appeals to me.

    Now can you explain again how exactly this perpetual warfare is going to be paid for?
    And exactly who do you support and in what way are they conservative?

  59. THG

    Smell the Neo-con fear.

  60. asus

    Ron Paul is the only honest person of the bunch. Those who attack him with mindless name-calling are simply ignorant imps.

  61. David

    I am a longtime Republican, an ARMY Vet, Life member in the NRA and TSRA. And I will keep sending money to Ron Paul, and vote for him when he wins the nomination. Your numbers are wrong.

    And you and your brand of hateful, shameful, fear-mongering will not prevail.

  62. invar

    I never once claimed that America is to blame.

    Ron Paul does.

    His explanation of what “blowback” constitutes in terms of the M.E. more than adequately puts him square in the Blame America First camp.

    Given his explanations of American unfair foreign and trade policies – if this were 1942 – he’d blame the attack at Pearl Harbor on “blowback” for our embargo on both steel and oil for Japan’s invasion of China.

    Hell, I’d bet he’d go farther and blame the creation of Nazi Germany and WWII on “Neocons” who crafted the Armistice to end WWI. Which is what he does, small elements of truth in complete misapplication to self loathing.

    It is the foreign policy of a few Americans that is to blame.

    Oh that’s right. We’re no longer a “you mess with one of us you mess with all of us America”. We’re a “The neocons did it all to screw America”.

    I also never said anything about global warming.

    No, I did. I tossed it in there because I’m waiting for Ron Paul or some of his kook followers to drop that bomb next since they say the same things the Left does when it comes to the anti-war Blame America crap.

    You are forgetting that I am a lifelong conservative.

    How can I forget? I don’t know who the hell you are.

    Besides, I’ve encountered many Leftists who use the tactic of saying they are Conservatives voting for Hillary or the Democrats because of how evil and wrong Christians like Bush are.

    It is the conservative ideal of Ron Paul that appeals to me.

    From what I can glean from Paul’s record – I might like his statements about domestic application of the Constitution, but he has accomplished nothing as a Congressman but mere bloviating about problems. All talk, no substance – and no chance of enacting anything he has discussed as policy.

    Radio talk show hosts have accomplished more for the cause of liberty than Ron Paul has during his tenure in various political offices.

    Now can you explain again how exactly this perpetual warfare is going to be paid for?

    I’m all for the spoils of war – but in today’s PC climate – that is not an option.

    I suppose since welfare is deemed more important than national security – it will be as Churchill warned:

    “If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as [dhimmis] slaves.”

    And exactly who do you support and in what way are they conservative?

    I don’t support anyone yet. None of them are the kind of Conservative I am looking for.

    The only thing I am absolutely sure of is who I will NOT be voting for and downright oppose, and outside of the Democrats that would be Ron Paul.

  63. invar

    …Life member in the NRA.

    That explains it.

    Tossing good money into orgs that promise they stand for your rights but end up a paper tiger in the presence of enemies who shred those rights.

    I dumped my NRA membership for the JPFO and the 2nd Amendment Patriots.

    And you and your brand of hateful, shameful, fear-mongering will not prevail.

    I think Winston Churchill heard something quite similar when he was ousted from the Admiralty in the 1930’s in deference to the appeasement policies of Neville Chamberlain.

    Interestingly, the same kind of idiocy Ron Paul espouses.

  64. EasyE

    >>I never once claimed that America is to blame.

    Ron Paul does.

    His explanation of what “blowback” constitutes in terms of the M.E. more than adequately puts him square in the Blame America First camp.<>Oh that’s right. We’re no longer a “you mess with one of us you mess with all of us America”. We’re a “The neocons did it all to screw America”.<<

    You have the uncanny ability to put words into peoples mouths. No one said they did it to screw anyone. All that is being said is that it is the wrong policy and it needs to be changed. So stop with your canned line of this being the leftist position and start supporting it with facts. If this is a leftist idea, to not pursue entangling foreign alliances, then why was it the advice of the founding fathers? Why do you say that Hillary will continue the entanglement? Why is it that Obama would like to bomb Iran and Pakistan? Why is it that you would like to provide welfare for the world? It seems to me that you are the one on the left.

    What kind of conservative are you looking for? You’ve chosen to attack the man that John McCain called, “The most honest man in congress.” the man that the National Taxpayers Union called, “The taxpayers best friend.” The man who has thus far received more donations from active and retired military personnel than any other candidate . The man who Matt Drudge says “comes up the winner” when he looks at the issues true to his heart. The man that Judge Andrew Napolitano called, “The Thomas Jefferson of our day.” A man that Milton Friedman endorsed as understanding “in a principled way the importance of property rights and religious freedom.”

    What are you looking for in a conservative? Ron Paul is by most measures the only conservative running for the presidency. You need to let the neocon agenda go and think about America again. The rest of the world was always screwed up and may always be screwed up, but we have something good in America and if you let it out of your focus it will slip away from us. The Constitution does mean something.

  65. EasyE

    Ron Paul made it perfectly clear in debate that the blame lies with those that created the policy. Not the American people.

  66. Pete Kolar

    I am upset that your photo caption did not disclose that this photo was taken while Dr. Paul was serving as understudy to Rod Stewart during the “If You Want My Body” World Tour of 1980.

    Thank you for showing us the wild side of Ron Paul. Ron Paul would never infringe on your First Amendment Right to write and publish articles like this. LONG LIVE THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!!!

    P.S. Ron Paul has a great sense of humor, and I’m sure he got a good laugh from your artwork.

  67. invar

    You have the uncanny ability to put words into peoples mouths. No one said they did it to screw anyone.

    Do yo not pay attention to what your fellow Ron Paul supporters say?

    “Neocons have ruined the country”

    “Neocons screw America”

    “Neocons are evil”

    Blah, blah blah. How many times did Ron Paul use that diatribe in the last debate?

    And I’M putting words in people’s mouths??

    How about your fellow pal Paul Revere II up there who suggested the Nazis had the right idea about rounding up ‘neocons’ like me?

    All that is being said is that it is the wrong policy and it needs to be changed. So stop with your canned line of this being the leftist position and start supporting it with facts.

    Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the entire national DNC along with moveOn.org and Code Pink say the same exact thing; “that it is the wrong policy and it needs to be changed”. I don’t know how many countless times Pelosi, Durbin, Obama, Hildabeast and the rest of them have uttered the same mantra.

    Them is FACTS bud. I don’t have the time to dump a zillion links to Leftist audio, youtube and blog sites that say the same damn thing the Ron Paul brigades are saying – you can look them up yourself.

    Unless want to try and tell me that they are not Leftists.

    They say the same things Ron Paul does – including blaming “neocons” for all the woe on the globe.

    If this is a leftist idea, to not pursue entangling foreign alliances, then why was it the advice of the founding fathers?

    I love how people bastardize the intent and meaning of the Founders. It’s the same technique the Gun Grabbing Stalinists use when distorting the meaning of “Well regulated militia” to refer to the National Guard.

    When Washington admonished avoiding foreign alliances, his reference was the way Europe created defense treaties to ensure if one nation went to war, the others would take their side and go to war also.

    He was not referencing “entangling foreign alliances” to mean buying oil, goods or having troops stationed somewhere in an age of aircraft and nuclear weaponry.

    The more you people keep tossing that line in my face, the more I am convinced that Ron Paul is indeed the absolute Isolationist you deny that he is.

    Why do you say that Hillary will continue the entanglement?

    I don’t think Hildabeast is as naive and as stupid when it comes to Jihadists as Ron Paul is illustrating himself.

    Why is it that Obama would like to bomb Iran and Pakistan?

    That’s more guts than anything Ron Paul has demonstrated. Obama’s idea is gross stupidity but at least he doesn’t sound like a limp-wristed pacifist in that set of sound bytes.

    Why is it that you would like to provide welfare for the world? It seems to me that you are the one on the left.

    Unless you are willing to nuke into oblivion any and every entity seeking our harm – engagement is absolutely necessary. Isolationism and non-intervention before both world wars ended up costing us more than we should have had to bear.

    It’s sad to hear how gung ho you people are to scream and bitch about welfare for the world when it comes to matters of national security – and so muted when it comes to discussing the Socialist nanny State here at home.

    What kind of conservative are you looking for?

    The Reagan kind.

    You’ve chosen to attack the man that John McCain called, “The most honest man in congress.” the man that the National Taxpayers Union called, “The taxpayers best friend.” The man who has thus far received more donations from active and retired military personnel than any other candidate ….

    Hear me when I say this – I don’t give a tinker’s damn if every person in the country but me and my wife thinks Ron Paul is God’s Chosen Deliverer, I have heard and read what he has said about 9-11 and the war on Jihadists and I unequivocally oppose the guy for president.

    I will say it again – he in my opinion is as dangerous for CINC as Hillary is. One will enslave us to Socialism, the other will ensure our dhimmitude.

    What are you looking for in a conservative?

    It isn’t Ron Paul. He is a Libertarian, NOT a Conservative. His foreign policy ideas and Isolationist stance disqualifies him for the office of CINC. Plus, I have heard nothing but Ross Perot-isms from him. He is great about ranting about the problems, but has no concrete steps and plans to get us from Socialism back to Republicanism.

    There is little he has accomplished in his tenure of public office but sponsorships for defeated bills and lone opposition to measures that sailed right over his head.

    You need to let the neocon agenda go and think about America again.

    Whatever.

    If not, will you too suggest I be rounded up and shot like your Ron Paul pals and the movOn.org buddies do?

    The Constitution does mean something.

    About the only thing I agree with you about.

    However, the Constitution does not mean we are to be sitting ducks in a hostile world intent on our destruction as so many Paulies are insisting it does.

    When Ron Paul is quoted favorably by Al Qaeda, Hugo Chavez and other Hate America tyrants – I want nothing to do with such an ally for them as they see Ron Paul.

  68. invar

    P.S. Ron Paul has a great sense of humor, and I’m sure he got a good laugh from your artwork.

    Just wait.

    The crazier and zanier he becomes as the campaigns wear on, so too will my artwork.

  69. EasyE

    “It’s sad to hear how gung ho you people are to scream and bitch about welfare for the world when it comes to matters of national security – and so muted when it comes to discussing the Socialist nanny State here at home.”

    Have you not noticed that Ron Paul is the only candidate talking about the value of the dollar, the illegality of the Federal Reserve, the massive deficits that we run and our obstructive tax policies.

    Perhaps there are some idiots who talk about rounding people like you up, but I haven’t and neither has Ron Paul. Some people are misguided by there feelings. Ron Paul stands for liberty, the liberty that you will lose if you proceed to feel it is important to police the world. Why do we have to have men and women stationed around the world? They simply become targets. We have the most advanced weapons the world has ever seen. If we need to take out a target we can do it at the drop of a hat even without troops in Japan and Germany and Korea.

    Don’t you see? Ron Paul is trying to protect your liberties, he is trying to shrink government, stop taxing us to death, stop spending into huge deficits. Ron Paul is the only candidate that even attempts to address social security, medicare, medicade, veterans benefits, the destruction of the dollar, and the multitude of failed government institutions. He is the only candidate that calls for a return to the rights of the states, an inherently Republican Conservative position.

    You’ve got it wrong. I do care about eliminating the nanny state at home and Ron Paul is the only candidate to even address the domestic issues with sound conservative policy. You are failing to see that perpetual warfare is contributing to the bankruptcy of America. I’ll ask you this, With the military technology that the US possesses, the ability to fire missiles from anywhere to anywhere, what purpose is it to have troops in harms way? What national security do we lose by staying at home and spending our money on protecting our borders and sniffing out the terrorists that are here now and preventing more from getting in?

    Your so busy focusing on this world agenda that you are completely willing to sacrifice the domestic conservative agenda.

    A coward is much more exposed to quarrels than a man of spirit.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    I hope our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us, that the less we use our power the greater it will be.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Educate and inform the whole mass of the people… They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Every generation needs a new revolution.
    -Thomas Jefferson

  70. EasyE

    “What kind of conservative are you looking for?

    The Reagan kind.”

    Ron Paul was one of only four Republicans to endorse Ronald Reagan for President.

    “Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”
    -Ronald Reagan

    You want Reagan? Watch this speech that Reagan gave in 1964

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1777069922535499977&q=reagan+a+time+for+choosing&total=27&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

    If after watching that you can’t see the similarities between Ron Paul and Ronald Reagan then you do not know who Ronald Reagan really was or who Ron Paul is.

  71. invar

    Have you not noticed that Ron Paul is the only candidate talking about the value of the dollar, the illegality of the Federal Reserve, the massive deficits that we run and our obstructive tax policies.

    Whoopdie doo. Everyone from Alex Jones to Starr Jones is talking about the the same thing these days.

    Like I said – Ron Paul is this Election Cycle’s Ross Perot. He knows how to cite the problems and get everyone stirred-up and pissed off about it – but has no viable solutions to them. I have yet to hear a definitive, workable and realistic proposal from him on how to get where we are to where we should be.

    Perhaps there are some idiots who talk about rounding people like you up, but I haven’t and neither has Ron Paul.

    You haven’t huh? Why don’t you scroll on up and read a few right here in the comments to this post.

    Would you like some PMs and E-mails I have received from self-proclaimed Ron Paul compatriots that suggest far worse than these?

    Some people are misguided by there feelings. Ron Paul stands for liberty, the liberty that you will lose if you proceed to feel it is important to police the world.

    We’ve lost far more liberties to the domestic welfare nanny-safety-helmet state than by all the international efforts we’ve made to police the globe.

    Why do we have to have men and women stationed around the world?

    The same reason we have police stations in every town and county in America.

    There are nasty people who like to violate the lives and liberties of others.

    They simply become targets.

    So are the police. So let’s close down every police station and disband the idea of peace officers, shall we?

    Care to see what every city in America will look like the next day??

    Now – extrapolate that and guess what the world is going to look like the day we do the same thing with our military forces around the world.

    We have the most advanced weapons the world has ever seen. If we need to take out a target we can do it at the drop of a hat even without troops in Japan and Germany and Korea.

    You have obviously never served in the military and have absolutely no clue what you are talking about whatsoever.

    It takes a ground pounder with a rifle to hold ground. Bombing targets from 30,000 feet did not put an end to Hitler, Tojo, Milosevich or any other maniac hell bent on conquest.

    Ron Paul is trying to protect your liberties

    No he’s not. He is going to make us Dhimmies and walking dead targets for Jihadists.

    he is trying to shrink government

    Where’s the viable plan to get us from where we are to where he says he wants us?

    stop taxing us to death, stop spending into huge deficits.

    Where’s the viable plan to get us from where we are to where he says he wants us?

    Ron Paul is the only candidate that even attempts to address social security, medicare, medicade, veterans benefits, the destruction of the dollar, and the multitude of failed government institutions.

    Whoopdie doo. Lots of us been bitching about those things for decades. AGAIN, where’s the viable plan to get us from where we are to where Ron Paul says he wants us?

    All I hear is more bitching.

    We already know what the problems are. There’s nothing I’ve read from him that adequately explains how he can realistically get us from point A to point B.

    He is the only candidate that calls for a return to the rights of the states, an inherently Republican Conservative position.

    How does he plan to do that? You think a Democrat Congress and the SCOTUS are going to just give up their usurped powers because he asks them to?? Is he going to rule by Executive Orders?

    We will trade one tyrannical beast for a dictatorship.

    I do care about eliminating the nanny state at home and Ron Paul is the only candidate to even address the domestic issues with sound conservative policy.

    What the HELL are those policies beyond noting them??

    You are failing to see that perpetual warfare is contributing to the bankruptcy of America.

    So is perpetual domestic welfare. I still do not see a viable plan that is workable and doable in this reality.

    I’ll ask you this, With the military technology that the US possesses, the ability to fire missiles from anywhere to anywhere, what purpose is it to have troops in harms way?

    Simple – America has no willpower to unleash such missiles as to quash threats – and as I said above – you cannot control an enemy without controlling ground. And the only way to control ground is by a soldier with a rifle in hand.

    Otherwise it’s just raining annihilation, and you aren’t going to end the threat – unless we nuke them – and America has no willpower to do so.

    Even after 9-11 – your messiah cautioned us against even the idea of using nukes – because as he stated ““Calm deliberation in our effort to restore normalcy is crucial. Cries for dropping nuclear bombs on an enemy not yet identified cannot possibly help in achieving this goal.”

    You cannot identify an assymetric enemy wearing civilian clothes and blending in with a population.

    Missiles are not going to solve that kind of threat- and you just provided me another sound reason why Ron Paul and his supporters should NEVER be given the helm of the CINC.

    What national security do we lose by staying at home and spending our money on protecting our borders and sniffing out the terrorists that are here now and preventing more from getting in?

    The same kind that comes knocking on our door as it did on 9-11, 12-7, and 5-7.

    You can cite Jefferson all you wish.

    He too sent Marines to fight Muslims.

    Something Ron Paul will never do but make nice trade deals with them and everyone.

  72. invar

    Ron Paul is no Ronald Reagan.

    Not even a shadow of him.

    He may have had kind words spoken by the Gipper – but Ron Paul since 9-11 is hardly the man Reagan would have lauded.

    If 9-11 happend under Reagan’s watch – you can bet that despite what Ron Paul pleaded in wimpish style – Reagan would have let them MX missiles fly.

  73. EasyE

    “Perhaps there are some idiots who talk about rounding people like you up, but I haven’t and neither has Ron Paul.

    You haven’t huh? Why don’t you scroll on up and read a few right here in the comments to this post.

    Would you like some PMs and E-mails I have received from self-proclaimed Ron Paul compatriots that suggest far worse than these?”

    Your comments show that you haven’t been reading what I wrote. I don’t care what other people might have said to you.

    “Some people are misguided by there feelings. Ron Paul stands for liberty, the liberty that you will lose if you proceed to feel it is important to police the world.

    We’ve lost far more liberties to the domestic welfare nanny-safety-helmet state than by all the international efforts we’ve made to police the globe.”

    That is exactly Ron Paul’s position if you bothered to make any effort to look into it and understand it. It is obvious that you have not because from one comment to another you continue to bring up the nanny state and say “what would Ron Paul do about that?” If you had bothered to examine his position you would see exactly what he plans to do about that and you would also notice that no other candidate even addresses the problems. Ron is also concerned about our foreign policy, not because it is limiting our liberty like the domestic policy but because it is destroying our security, our dollar, and our people.

  74. Anon

    How can someone be pro-life and pro-war? Please explain that too me. When I get that explaination, I’ll vote for Guilani and watch Hilary win. Only Ron Paul can defeat Hilary!!

  75. EasyE

    “From what I can glean from Paul’s record – I might like his statements about domestic application of the Constitution, but he has accomplished nothing as a Congressman but mere bloviating about problems. All talk, no substance – and no chance of enacting anything he has discussed as policy.”

    If you cared to look you would see the Ron Paul has introduced more substantive pieces of legislation than probably any other congressman.

    And “blowback” was not a term invented by Ron Paul. It is a term used by the CIA to describe exactly that which occurred in Iran and other areas of the globe that we have meddled.

    “Even after 9-11 – your messiah cautioned us against even the idea of using nukes – because as he stated ““Calm deliberation in our effort to restore normalcy is crucial. Cries for dropping nuclear bombs on an enemy not yet identified cannot possibly help in achieving this goal.”

    You cannot identify an assymetric enemy wearing civilian clothes and blending in with a population.

    He did say that and then our enemy was identified as Osama bin Laden. Bear in mind that those statements were made on September 25th, before we knew who planned the attack. If you will also note, he mentions in the same speech that we risk the war spreading if we do not remain focused. Where do we stand today? We are in Iraq and Osama bin Laden is not even on the radar screen anymore. Ron Paul was all for going after the people responsible for 9/11 and he was exactly correct about what would happen in a “war on terror” if we were not focused.

    The fact that he had the vision to see down the road and not think only in the moment is the truest testament to his leadership abilities.

  76. EasyE

    In regards to Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Coast:

    Before the US had a Navy, a policy of tribute was used to protect American merchant ships by paying ransoms to the pirates (much like the tributes we now pay to India, Pakistan, and North Korea for having nuclear weapons). Jefferson argued against this claiming that it would only welcome more attacks (In much the same way that Ron Paul argues against supporting regimes with nuclear weapons—or any country for that matter—as it only welcomes more development of nuclear weapons).

    Jefferson fought the Barbary Pirates and the Pasha of Tripoli only after they had declared war with the US (In much the same way Ron Paul voted for going after those responsible for 9/11).

    Jefferson did not however turn his efforts towards the rest of the Muslim world or towards others that spoke ill about the United States (In direct contrast to the Bush Administration who has taken upon war with Iraq and preparing to attack Iran).

    Please stop with your claim that Ron Paul supporters are left wing nut jobs. I voted for George W Bush twice and I don’t regret it. I do, however, regret that he could not have used more forethought in his decision to go to war. If we are to be beholden to UN resolutions and fight wars based on them, instead of US law then we have lost our sovereignty. UN law superseding US law is something the left wants and George Bush has agreed too. Ron Paul wants to remove all support for the UN and start following US law instead of international law. He wants to place power back in the hands of the states. He wants to end dependence on the federal government. He wants to eliminate the income tax. He wants to stop deficit spending. He wants to uphold the constitution. He wants to enact a policy of sound money. If you were a true conservative, it wouldn’t matter to you how likely it is or not for him to achieve these goals, the only thing that would matter is that he shares these goals with you. If you can not support these positions then you are not a true conservative. You seem to only be concerned with war in a country that never attacked us and the perpetual “nanny stating” of it thereafter while and the same time ignoring the core beliefs of conservatism.

  77. invar

    How can someone be pro-life and pro-war? Please explain that too me.

    Read your bible and maybe you’ll understand it.

    God ordered Israel to kill those nations who fed their children to the fires of Molech.

    War is necessary in this present evil world, or evil triumphs.

    It is going to take God to wage war on mankind to ultimately bring peace – but that aspect of biblical truth is obviously not in your understanding.

  78. invar

    How can someone be pro-life and pro-war? Please explain that too me.

    Read your bible and maybe you’ll understand it.

    God ordered Israel to kill those nations who fed their children to the fires of Molech.

    War is necessary in this present evil world, or evil triumphs.

    It is going to take God to wage war on mankind to ultimately bring peace – but that aspect of biblical truth is obviously not in your understanding.

  79. invar

    I don’t care what other people might have said to you.

    Too bad. Part of my opposition to Ron Paul is by the company he keeps and the kind of support he gets.

    I’m not going to support anyone who has followers threatening to kill me because they do not like my speech.

    Period.

    That is exactly Ron Paul’s position if you bothered to make any effort to look into it and understand it.

    I do NOT GIVE A DAMN what HIS POSITION IS! I want to know EXACTLY HOW DOES HE PROPOSE TO BRING ABOUT HIS POSITIONS????

    Give me A.B.C. – 1.2.3.

    I will say this again – he has listed the problem, he has stated his oppositions to the problem or policy – he has given NO VIABLE plan to bring those positions to fruition outside of closing every military base in the world and bringing all troops home.

    Which leads me back to my police station analogy.

    If you had bothered to examine his position you would see exactly what he plans to do about that

    Outside of bringing all U.S. military forces home and closing U.S. bases – (the absolute STUPIDEST IDEA OF ALL TIME) he has not articulated how to get us where we are to point B on all those ‘other’ issues he rants about.

    If you cared to look you would see the Ron Paul has introduced more substantive pieces of legislation than probably any other congressman.

    No, not substantive – they were mostly DOA or defeated. He has accomplished very little in getting even what he has introduced enacted into law.

    And “blowback” was not a term invented by Ron Paul. It is a term used by the CIA to describe exactly that which occurred in Iran and other areas of the globe that we have meddled.

    The same ideologues who thought Clinton was the greatest prez in our lifetimes?

    He did say that and then our enemy was identified as Osama bin Laden.

    Jihad is bigger than one man or one organisation. If you think all we have to do is get rid of Bin Laden and the problem of militant Islam is solved – you are as clueless as the rest of the anti-war imbeciles from moveOn.org.

    Which is exactly why Ron Paul should be defeated.

    Ron Paul was all for going after the people responsible for 9/11 and he was exactly correct about what would happen in a “war on terror” if we were not focused.

    Ron Paul has no understanding of the nature of the enemy that has been at war with us for nearly 3 decades. He simply regurgitates their justifications as proof we need to run away home and stop ‘antagonizing them’.

    Our mere existence antagonizes them if he would bother to study their estacheology – whcih he clearly has not.

    I will listen to and read our enemies long before I listen to anything Ron Paul has to say about them.

    He just continues to illustrate his ignorance about them.

    Please stop with your claim that Ron Paul supporters are left wing nut jobs.

    Sorry, but a huge chunk of them are. Especially the anti-war nitwits that run between the Ron Paul campaign and Code Pink/moveOn.org.

    If we are to be beholden to UN resolutions and fight wars based on them, instead of US law then we have lost our sovereignty.

    When SCOTUS looks to European laws to make Constitutional judgements – as Ruth Bader Ginsberg admitted, our sovereignty is already been compromised.

    Plus – how many times did we hear the charge that the U.S. has acted “unilaterally” in waging war in A’stan and Iraq???

    What the the hell was all that footsie with the UN if we acted “unilaterally”??

    Ron Paul says we are acting ‘unilaterally’ – which puts him in the same clueless camp as the rest of the Leftist anti-war bunch.

    Ron Paul wants to remove all support for the UN and start following US law instead of international law.

    HOW does he plan to do that with SCOTUS and Congress supporting the UN????

    More Executive Orders??

    He wants to place power back in the hands of the states.

    HOW is he going to do that with Federal Judges striking down state initiatives???

    MORE Executive Orders? Or will he do as Chavez has done and just disband the federal Court system?

    He wants to end dependence on the federal government.

    Blah, blah, blah….more meaningless political pap – HOW – HOW- HOW does he plan to end such dependence?? How does he plan to overcome the courts and the Congress in doing so???

    He has no plan – just endless pontifications.

    He wants to eliminate the income tax.

    HOW does he intend to do that? WHAT will replace the current system and what will the BLOWBACK be?

    He wants to stop deficit spending.

    Congress controls the purse strings.

    HOW does he plan to do that? Veto every piece of legislation that comes from Congress?

    If you were a true conservative, it wouldn’t matter to you how likely it is or not for him to achieve these goals, the only thing that would matter is that he shares these goals with you.

    Ahhh, so now we come to it.

    It doesn’t matter if Ron Paul’s ideas are a silly pipe dream – all that matters is whether or not I agree with Ron Paul.

    Like I said – he has no substance, it’s all wind.

    If you can not support these positions then you are not a true conservative.

    If you say so.

    Ron Paul is NO Conservative. He’s a Libertarian. he’s weak on defense and national security and thinks like an idiot we should ‘dialogue’ with people who want to wipe us off the face of the earth.

    Then there’s the Gimme Drug Crowd who is anxious for him to legalize their addictions.

    No – Ron Paul is no Conservative, despite your campaign shilling for him.

  80. EasyE

    Are you a conservative? What would you like to see other than every Muslim dead? You have failed in anyway to define what conservatism is to you, other than your notion of Reagan which is severely misguided. Ron Paul is the only candidate to support a conservative agenda and routinely site history as a basis for his beliefs and history is on his side.

    [edited – go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com to get the same official campaign talking points]…If nothing gets done, then so what, at least we won’t have a new pile of legislation to suffocate under. If Ron Paul’s current legislative efforts have failed it simply shows an unwillingness of the so-called conservatives in congress to actually fight for what they believe in and says nothing about the substance of the legislation. Instead, the conservatives in congress sell-out on the conservative ideology to gain political expedience and re-election.

    [edited – go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com to get the same official campaign talking points]

    How will other candidates enact their policies? And what exactly are there policies? The only ones that I’ve heard are those of a socialist philosophy.

    Good luck with your policy of pursuing Islam to the ends of the earth while supporting the governments under which the fundamentalists grow there ranks, and at the same time ignoring the domestic conservative philosophy you claim to support. We can not sustain a military campaign without an achievable goal. What is the goal in Iraq and how is that going to be realized? Your effort is futile and will result in the destruction of America through the depreciation of the dollar, destruction of the economy, and deterioration of our military through endless campaigns. We have already seen the dollar depreciate 10% this year alone. Who even says anything about that, oh yeah, Ron Paul does. Ever since he joined congress he has been warning about that.

    Go ahead and call Ron Paul a libertarian if you want. [edited – go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com to get the same official campaign talking points]

  81. invar

    EasyE –

    You can stop campaign shilling for Ron Paul on my blog. I will not be voting for the guy, and I will be blogging and urging others not to vote for him due the important foreign policy issues I consider him to be a complete moronic imbecile on.

    Also, the rabid cult following of his supporters who think he is the messiah and whom offer death threats for those who oppose their wannabe king – ensure that my oppostion to Ron Paul as CINC is solid and unbreakable.

    Are you a conservative? What would you like to see other than every Muslim dead?

    More moveOn.org talking points.

    I want to war on Militant Islam the way we warred on the Imperial Japanese and the Nazis – until they sue for peace on our terms unconditionally – or they are annihilated from the planet.

    The way you people think, if this was 1943 – you’d be asking me if I wanted to see every Jap and German dead.

    You have failed in anyway to define what conservatism is to you

    I know what it means to me, and Ron Paul is not it. He is at best a Libertarian with a few conservative ideas.

    How will other candidates enact their policies? And what exactly are there policies? The only ones that I’ve heard are those of a socialist philosophy.

    Almost agreed. I’ve heard details of a few platforms of some candidates that are viable. I’ve heard nothing but platitudes from Paul.

    He is, in my estimation – another Ross Perot.

    Good luck with your policy of pursuing Islam to the ends of the earth while supporting the governments under which the fundamentalists grow there ranks, and at the same time ignoring the domestic conservative philosophy you claim to support.

    That’s just more pacifistic Isolationist crap from the premise that killing enemies just breeds more enemies.

    If that were the case – we should have lost all the wars we ever fought in.

    It’s stupid and I don’t buy it. I’ve seen what peace through strength and a willingness to use a big stick on punks does to keep the peace.

    Your effort is futile and will result in the destruction of America through the depreciation of the dollar, destruction of the economy, and deterioration of our military through endless campaigns.,

    Blah, blah, yada, yada…it’s the same anti-war rhetoric coming from George Soros’ front groups and the litany of Commie/Anarchist anti-war sites out there.

    The dollar is depreciation has nothing to do with the war, and everything to do with the Fed and our debt.

    If we never went to war after 9-11, the situation would remain the same if not worse for the economy.

    And again – Ronald Reagan would have waged war on the Jihadists after 9-11 the way we went to war on the Japs and Nazis, if not lighting up nukes.

    THAT is the fundamental difference between what you call Paul’s conservatism and Reagans.

    Ron Paul is no Reagan.

    Not even a shadow of him.

  82. EasyE

    I have nothing to do with moveon.org. Like I told you before, I’ve been a lifelong conservative Republican. And you almost have the big stick policy right. The idea is walk softly and carry a big stick. What I’m saying is that the foreign policy of America is failing at the walk softly part. And I’ve not once said throughout this debate that we should never use the big stick. You, however, would just assume club everyone over the head.

    It is people of your view that have relegated the conservative agenda in the Republican party to the dustbin.

    You have continuously failed to debate me with any substance and simply attempt to paint me as a leftist. I have presented you with evidence of Ron Paul’s conservative nature and even is legislative achievements and attempts, I’ve even shown you that your view of history has been skewed. I’ve shown you that libertarianism and conservatism were regarded as the same path by Ronald Reagan. If your waiting for Reagan himself to come back, you will be waiting forever. Ron Paul is the closest thing this country has to Ronald Reagan.

    I for one am not going to let people like you pervert what conservatism is. I am a conservative. I stand for limited government, lower taxes, decreased spending, personal freedoms and free trade. Talk all you want about Paul being a left wing nut job, but me and the rest of the true conservatives see the failings of our party and will support the only conservative running for president.

  83. EasyE

    “The dollar is depreciation has nothing to do with the war, and everything to do with the Fed and our debt.”

    Ron Paul is the only candidate that would like to see the Fed abolished. And what exactly about the war doesn’t effect our debt?

  84. invar

    I have nothing to do with moveon.org.

    Your talking points are nearly identical to theirs when it comes to your anti-war positions.

    The giveaway is when you ask or suggest I want to kill all Muslims in the world.

    The idea is walk softly and carry a big stick. What I’m saying is that the foreign policy of America is failing at the walk softly part.

    Not even close. When Ron Paul says we should have discussions with all regimes and all entities – what in the living hell do we ‘discuss’ with people who deny the holocaust happened, state that they are going to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and conquer the world for Islam??

    How do you talk with people who say Christians are Kuffars and have stolen their religion from Muslims and therefore deserve death???

    How do you “talk” with a madman who slips letters into wells and preaches that he is going to initiate the Apocalypse in order to bring his Hidden Imam back from the dead??

    No, I’m sorry – Ron Paul’s idea of “speaking softly” is nothing but appeasement idiocy that legitimizes rogues and despots.

    And I’ve not once said throughout this debate that we should never use the big stick. You, however, would just assume club everyone over the head.

    Excuse you, but I am not advocating invading Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and so on – which would be ‘clubbing everyone over the head’.

    You have no understanding of what kind of assymetric war we are involved – and whether we choose to fight it or not – the enemy WILL fight, because it is part and parcel of their faith in bringing their prophecies to fulfillment. Besides, I think you were the one who said we have missiles we can club everyone to death with from afar if needed.

    My question to you and Paul would be – how many Americans are you willing to see die first, how many cities are you willing to see get vaporized BEFORE you decide it’s time to wield the stick, and then what nation will you use those missiles on after-the-fact?

    It is people of your view that have relegated the conservative agenda in the Republican party to the dustbin.

    Because I see and understand the need to wage this war on the ideology commited to our destruction??

    You’re a typical loony spinmeister. Conservatism has been relegated to the GOP dustbin by the likes of liberal Republicans like Chaffee, Jeffords, Snowe and the rest of the northeastern Bluebloods that have the ear of this Administration and the rest of the coattail Republicans.

    You have continuously failed to debate me with any substance and simply attempt to paint me as a leftist.

    You have done nothing but dump Ron Paul’s campaign website on my blog here, and contrary to you statement – when your diatribes such as the use of “neocon”, “I wanna kill all Muslims” and that assorted crap – then yes – I am going to note that it is exactly the same anti-war rhetoric we hear from the Left.

    If that makes you uncomfortable – then you might want to note the company the Ron Paul campaign has attracted, and I’ll say again – when I have people issuing death threats and suggesting that people like me should be rounded up and shot for treason for exercising my free political speech – then I want nothing to do with them, or the candidate they support.

    They are tyrants above even that of the Stalinists running the DNC.

    I have presented you with evidence of Ron Paul’s conservative nature and even is legislative achievements and attempts

    You’ve presented me with campaign tripe.

    Ron Paul opposes the Death Penalty, voted against prison funding and urged alternative sentencing rather than prison time for violent offenders.

    He voted to legalize pot, and has an A- rating from VOTE HEMP.

    He wants to abolish the DHS – voted to require warrants before surveilling electronic intercepts from foreign nationals coming INTO the country.

    He praised reagan for having the “moral courage” to turn tail and run from Lebanon after our marines were killed by Iranian guerillas in what later became Hezbollah, in whom their leader Hassan Nasarella daily calls for the death and destruction of America.

    These few subjects ALONE identify Ron Paul as a kook Libertarian – NOT a Conservative.

    Ron Paul is the closest thing this country has to Ronald Reagan.

    Then we’re doomed. I will not be voting for a kook that will grant Jihadists the victory over us.

    And people wonder why Ahmadinejad quotes Ron Paul and prefers Hillary or Ron Paul for President.

    I’m waiting for Paul to quote Noam Chomsky next.

  85. James

    [edited]

    This gets old, please vote for Giuliani. He’s on his 3rd wife, evidently his cousin wasn’t a good lay.

    Or vote for Mitt. He’s flip-flopped on abortion and gay rights enough. He’s also looking for his 3rd wife, the morman way.

    Or Thompson and his trophy wife. Just what we want to teach our daughters, marry an old man.

    And Ron Paul? Married to the same woman for 40+ years…scumbag. Delivered +4000 babies…just a front for his secret pro-life views.

  86. invar

    This gets old, please vote for Giuliani. He’s on his 3rd wife, evidently his cousin wasn’t a good lay.

    Or vote for Mitt. He’s flip-flopped on abortion and gay rights enough. He’s also looking for his 3rd wife, the morman way.

    Or Thompson and his trophy wife. Just what we want to teach our daughters, marry an old man.

    Obviously the Ron Paul campaign has the same people providing their Talking Points that the DNC/ Democrat Underground/MoveOn.org/Daily Kos Leftist Kooks spew ad nauseum.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/23/23228/2373

    Same talking point bullsheist, the same spirit.

    Just one more proof why the cult of Ron Paul is insane and as dangerous as the Stalinists are.

  87. Not indoctrinated

    I hope to God that an article packed with so much hypocrisy and unintelligible hatred could only be a bomb cooked by one of our “monsters in men’s clothing” over in the Whitehouse or Pentagon, not by any sympathetic human on this Earth. For the sake of your country, people, I would recommend reading Chomsky instead of watching CNN. Open your eyes, Ron Paul is America’s LAST HOPE, and when (not if) Clinton is elected (regrettably), she will finish America off once and for all.

  88. invar

    For the sake of your country, people, I would recommend reading Chomsky

    Yup – exactly what I have been saying about Ron Paul supporters – they defend people like Ahmadinejad, and justify what Bin Laden did by blaming America and then go on to recommend we read Noam Chomsky – A KNOWN SOCIALIST, ANARCHIST and America-hating activist who is cited and applauded by dictator Hugo Chavez and Iran’s Ahmadinejad as a “great American” for his criticism of this country.

    Right, I wanna go and read and support people America’s enemies quote, applaud and want to be president.

    Just more reasons you crazies stoke me up to oppose Ron Paul even more vigorously than I have. I’m thinking that not only is Ron Paul not fit for CINC, but he’s not fit to be elected dog catcher of a county.

    You people are truly become an insane cult to yourselves.

    People who insist a delusional old man is America’s messiah and the only hope for the country are as dangerous and frightening to me as if I were a Jew surrounded by Brownshirts on the streets of Berlin in 1934.

    And if you want to scream “hatred” for pointing out the insanity of Ron Paul’s anti-war stance, I will say again – not even Hillary’s people have threatened me with death for speaking my mind.

    Ron Paul’s people have.

    So let’s have some perspective on who really ‘hates’ here.

    It seems in my reading that the Ron Paul nutcases are as tyrannical as the Stalinists who march for the Leftists, and probably more dangerous to my liberty than Ahmadinejad. At least he hasn’t said I should be shot for my free exercise of speech.

    At this point, after the kinds of threats and nutjobs telling me to read Chomsky and blame myself for causing 9-11, I now view Ron Paul as a danger to freedom itself, and I’m just that much more commited to rallying against him.

    You people are insane crazies, wanting a king to lead you to deliverance.

    I want no part of you, or your messiah.

  89. EasyE

    “[edited – go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com to get the same official campaign talking points]”

    I like how you say that Ron Paul hasn’t done anything in congress and when I dispute you with fact you remove it.

    I also apreciate your bashing the libertarian position while removing my quote from Ronald Reagan distinctly saying “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”

    I also like how you continue to support this foreign policy and even try to turn my siting of Jefferson against me without every understanding the history behind his going to war. And yet you still fail to address the tributes that we are paying to nations around the world, including those that do not exactly stand for liberty, i.e. (Pakistan, India, Iran pre-sanctions, Israel, Egypt, Palistine, etc.)

    And how you comment on everything I’ve said but fail to answer the question that I asked of you.

    What is the goal in Iraq and how is that going to be realized?

    I am a conservative and I am for Ron Paul. If some crazy nutcases want to join in, I don’t care. Anyone that votes for someone based on one issue is most certainly crazy, but I’m voting based on his consistent record for liberty and a return to the constitution.

    You can’t name a single politician that has a more consistent conservative constitutional voting record or position than Ron Paul.

  90. invar

    I like how you say that Ron Paul hasn’t done anything in congress and when I dispute you with fact you remove it.

    No, you did not post facts – you posted a listing of campaign tripe talking points lifted from his campaign website. It reads like all the other campaign crap I receive that list all the “wonderful” positions and “accomplishments” of a candidate running for office.

    I edited out your electioneering and left what I considered was germane to the conversation without the campaign spam. I sent them directly to the source to get the same information you listed as ‘facts’. I will not put up with spamming for any candidate.

    He has not had any legislation he has sponsored pass the House, and he is known as Dr. No among his colleagues.

    I also apreciate your bashing the libertarian position while removing my quote from Ronald Reagan distinctly saying “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”

    I’m pretty sure Ronald Reagan would not be supporting the libertarian America-bashing views of Dr. Paul and his crackpot supporters post 9-11.

    I also like how you continue to support this foreign policy and even try to turn my siting of Jefferson against me without every understanding the history behind his going to war.

    Your history on the war on the Barbary Pirates is deliberately skewed in application to the current conflict. You might try reading “Victory in Tripoli: How America’s War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation By Joshua E. London”.

    “Tributes” were bribes paid to stop the Mohommadens from attacking our merchant ships – “protection money” is a better analogy – yet you try and equate foreign aid as “protection money”. I’m not quite as gullible as you are in succumbing to such juvenile simplicity.

    The true history of the Tripoli war – is one that illustrates exactly why the policies of appeasement, half-hearted efforts and cut and running in the face of Jihadists are recipes for disaster for America.

    And how you comment on everything I’ve said but fail to answer the question that I asked of you.

    What is the goal in Iraq and how is that going to be realized?

    I answered that question in detail above. It’s revealing to now understand you do not read the rebuttals – just electioneer for your messiah.

    I am a conservative and I am for Ron Paul. If some crazy nutcases want to join in, I don’t care.

    Right – you’ll stand with anyone who supports your messiah, even if they are threatening death and violence on those who are exercising their free political speech.

    How downright Lenin-esque of you.

    You can’t name a single politician that has a more consistent conservative constitutional voting record or position than Ron Paul.

    I don’t care if I agree with 99% of what Ron Paul stands for. The most important issue to me is one he aligns himself with the rabid anti-war Left on.

    So no – he will not get my vote – and those Ron Paul supporters who keep threatening me with violence continue to push me towards getting more militant in my opposition to him.

    Like I said – you belong to a cult that thinks Ron Paul is some kind of messiah.

    I want nothing to do with such an insane mob.

    In fact – I want it defeated.

  91. EasyE

    His legislative efforts are fact and actually, nothing I’ve posted here came from his campaign website. It’s obvious that you’ve never been to his website. And never once has he bashed America. Disagreeing with the presidents foreign policy is not bashing America. So stop lying or produce the evidence of Ron Paul blaming the American people.

    I’ve read everything you’ve written and you did not answer my question “What is the goal in Iraq and how is that going to be realized?” The closest thing I got was “I want to war on Militant Islam the way we warred on the Imperial Japanese and the Nazis – until they sue for peace on our terms unconditionally – or they are annihilated from the planet.”

    I know what you would like to do in Iraq, but please answer my question. What is the current goal in Iraq, specifically, and how are we going to achieve it?

    It is insane to think that our spending money in Iraq is going to change anything about the Islamist philosophy. You said yourself that Americans can’t stomach blowing up the whole place. So what do you suggest instead, placing our troops in vulnerable positions and leaving them there, to what end? When will we ever not have troops stationed around the world? How much longer can we afford to do it?

    Fighting in Iraq is not going to stop any terrorist from getting on a plane and coming to the US, it’s not going to stop any terrorists that are here from fulfilling their plans, and it’s not going to be able to create a new government of Iraq without the support of the Iraqi people.

    Why should we be protecting Iraq’s borders and creating their government while at the same time ignoring our own borders and ignoring our constitution?

    I would like to end terrorism as much as you but if we cannot think logically about the precarious position that out policy has put us in then we will meet our end at the hands of that policy. The liberals think that spending all of the working man’s money on the poor will cure poverty. All that does is create more poverty. Do you think that spending all of our money oversees to create favorable governments will cure terrorism? All that is doing is creating more terrorism and more poverty. It is also causing resentment by the people towards governments that they feel are puppets of the US, e.g. Pakistan. It is happening now. You cannot ignore the influence we have had in Pakistan, how would you explain what is going on?

    To say that we have not been interfering with foreign governments is to ignore history. We had been interfering all of the world long before 9/11. Do yourself a favor and step back from your position for a moment, don’t take any position, critically analyze the history of America and what we have done on foreign policy. After examining all historical evidence then choose your position. I have made the mistake in the past of not doing that as has everyone. Now I take no position without critically reasoning through available evidence.

    I don’t condone any threats that were made against you and I don’t think they are right in making them. I believe that they should stop. But I did go through all the post by anyone other than you and I, and I only found one threat, if you can call it that. It was more of a suggestion that neo-cons be rounded up, and it wasn’t even directed at you. But Ron Paul didn’t make the threats and he wouldn’t condone them either. There are crazy people supporting every candidate, but their making threats shouldn’t detract from what Ron Paul is saying.

    We need to return to the constitution.

  92. invar

    It’s obvious that you’ve never been to his website.

    Why – because you say so? I been there – I don’t agree with your messiah’s views on Isolationism and his essays about why he thinks Jihadists are at war with us.

    I think they are downright stupid.

    And never once has he bashed America. Disagreeing with the presidents foreign policy is not bashing America. So stop lying or produce the evidence of Ron Paul blaming the American people.

    Excuse you – but what the HELL is the continuous use of “neocon” as the spawn of Satan to describe myself and fellow countrymen as the cause of all our foreign policy problems?

    How many damn times did your messiah use that term in the last debate?

    I know who he meant and what he meant by it.

    He blames America, that’s how I view him. Period.

    I’ve read everything you’ve written and you did not answer my question “What is the goal in Iraq and how is that going to be realized?”

    How about when there’s a McDonalds and a Starbuck’s in every town and we have the largest military bases able to strike at Jihadists in the nest of the ME work for you?

    Worked in Japan. Worked in Germany. Works for me.

    If you don’t like that answer – too damn bad because the truth is there is no answer outside of running home and retreating that is going to satisfy you.

    It is insane to think that our spending money in Iraq is going to change anything about the Islamist philosophy.

    You’d be saying the same stupid thing about the Imperial Japanese and the Nazis too if this were 1944.

    History proves you wrong. We’ve already shown that we can change a barbaric philosophy by what we have done in those places post WWII.

    So what do you suggest instead, placing our troops in vulnerable positions and leaving them there, to what end? When will we ever not have troops stationed around the world? How much longer can we afford to do it?

    How much longer can we afford our breads and circus welfare state?

    I’d rather spend money on troops, jets and bombs and allies fighting this war than pay outs for a dependent class of squatters in our own country.

    I know national security doesn’t mean squat to a huge chunk of your fellow cult members, but I’ll be damned I’m going to take Ron Paul’s Isolationist positions and wake up one morning and find Chicago and Houston are gone because we provided plenty of time and space for those intent on fulfilling Islamic Prophecy to do so.

    Fighting in Iraq is not going to stop any terrorist from getting on a plane and coming to the US

    Blah..blah…”fighting in France is not going to stop any Kamikazi or Nazi…blah…blah…” We used to call that Yellow – as in cowardice.

    it’s not going to be able to create a new government of Iraq without the support of the Iraqi people.

    You need to get out from the anti-war sites you are stuck in and read some real news. Oh that’s right – there is no news in the MSM because the people in Iraq are supporting the new government to crack down on Insurgents and that does not fit the Anti-war agenda.

    Why should we be protecting Iraq’s borders and creating their government while at the same time ignoring our own borders

    I don’t have an answer to that insanity for you – outside of the fact the Politicos want the votes and welfare numbers for permanent power – which is why the borders are wide open.

    Tancredo’s ad speaks to that issue.

    But we do not have to have a one or the other policy. If you understood anything about Islamic Estacheology – you would know that Islam believes that the Mahdi army will conquer the world from Babylon – which is why everyone from Ahmadinejad to Bin Laden want America out of Iraq.

    Frankly – I say the hell with what they want – and we prevent them from doing what they think is their divine mission.

    I would like to end terrorism as much as you but if we cannot think logically about the precarious position that out policy has put us in then we will meet our end at the hands of that policy.

    The policy of non-interventionism in regards to engaging Jihadists since 1979 led directly to 9-11.

    We tried what you suggest – in the 19 teens, the 193o’s and during the 1980’s and 90’s. It ALWAYS ended up with many, many, many lives wasted to stop the course to conquer the world.

    Do you think that spending all of our money oversees to create favorable governments will cure terrorism?

    The other option is to simply annihilate the hostile ones or ignore them until they no longer ignore us??? I think an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    All that is doing is creating more terrorism and more poverty.

    Blah, blah, blah….warring on Nazis will make more Nazis….warring on Japs will make more Japs…

    As my marine buddies and Hog drivers in the Air Force understand, warring on Jihadists gets rid of Jihadists. They’re like cockroaches and as any pest control specialist can tell you, eliminate the nest and you eliminate the problem.

    I’m all for eliminating the nests and replacing them with healthy and sterile environments that impede reinfestation.

    You cannot ignore the influence we have had in Pakistan, how would you explain what is going on?

    Ann Coulter’s new column does a great job of addressing that issue better than I can and with biting wit:

    http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter111507.php3

    We had been interfering all of the world long before 9/11.

    I do not buy into that premise and never will – so sell that Blame America crap elsewhere – it won’t sell here.

    You want to be critical and blame this country for all the woe on the globe – be my guest, but you can stop trying to convince the rest of America that we’re shits.

    I don’t condone any threats that were made against you and I don’t think they are right in making them. I believe that they should stop. But I did go through all the post by anyone other than you and I, and I only found one threat, if you can call it that. It was more of a suggestion that neo-cons be rounded up, and it wasn’t even directed at you. But Ron Paul didn’t make the threats and he wouldn’t condone them either.

    I didn’t say he did – but the insane mobs supporting your guy as messiah – are truly as frightening as what the peasants endured by the bolsheviks.

    From my own e-mails to forums and other blogs – the commentaries by Ron Paul supporters are downright vicious – and not only have they suggesting “rounding up” people like me and shooting us – but going so far as to suggest we are the seed of Satan.

    Since we’re to judge the fruits – what I see from the Ron Paul people is far more dangerous than anything from the other candidates.

    As I said – not even the Clinton Crime Machine or her supporting brigades have threatened me with death and imprisonment for speaking my mind about Hillary.

    but their making threats shouldn’t detract from what Ron Paul is saying.

    Too late – they more than have.

    You might wish to do a bit of research about how mobs function and force position changes of even supposedly stalwart leaders.

    I want nothing to do with your mob.

    And as I said – I view what is taking place with your mob as I would be if I were a Jew living in Berlin in 1934. I see the similarities – and I want nothing to do with it – except stand in opposition to it.

    The whole of Germany…er America can seig heil Ron Paul as savior of the Homeland – but I see the danger from you people in the threats I’ve already received. Combine that with what I vehemently disagree with Ron Paul’s positions – and there’s no chance in hell I’m going to do anything but campaign against him.

  93. EasyE

    “The policy of non-interventionism in regards to engaging Jihadists since 1979 led directly to 9-11.”

    If you examine the policies they are blatantly interventionist. And intervention before then lead to the Iran hostage crisis. Does our support for Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Palestine stop terrorists from those countries from learning to hate America?

    Here’s a link to a Cato Institute article all about our interventionist policies:

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

    Please don’t dismiss it out of hand as it has over 200 citations and wasn’t just made up. You might learn something you didn’t know.

    In regard to Ann Coulter’s column: Does democracy work or not? If it’s ok for us to force it on Iraq why is it ok for Pakistan to take it away? Or is it that democracy is only ok when we like who is in power? Ann Coulter’s article would suggest that Democracy is a failure and that it is alright to suspend a constitution. I hope that there aren’t plans for that here.

    In the end perhaps you could be right about Ron Paul’s foreign policy, but our cities are certainly not safer by being in Iraq. Protecting our cities depends on our borders, not Iraq’s. I would much prefer to continue the implementation of conservative policies domestically and have a return to the constitution and protect our own country than to completely ignore our domestic issues while protecting someone else’s country.

    Let’s say Al-Qaeda did gain support in Iraq and took it over, wouldn’t that then give us the justification we need for destroying the entire place? Until that happens it is merely conjecture. But if we were that worried about the danger to America we would have already attacked Iran. Iraq is decades away from having any capability to attack us and Iran is still not capable. The threat to us now is individuals here within our borders or those that plan on coming here. In Iraq they can’t do anything to us.

    “You might wish to do a bit of research about how mobs function and force position changes of even supposedly stalwart leaders.”

    If he hasn’t changed his positions a single time since he’s been involved with politics I don’t think he’s gonna change now. Meanwhile, the only consistent thing about any of the other candidates is that they change their positions.

    I’ve got a book for you to read, you might like it based on the comments you keep writing. It’s called “Mobs, Messiahs and Markets” by William Bonner and Lila Rajiva

  94. invar

    In regard to Ann Coulter’s column: Does democracy work or not?

    Mob rule works only for a short time.

    Our form of democracy can only work in a Christian republic. We are losing our republic – funny how few correlate the diminshment of Christianity with the diminishment of our republic.

    Ann Coulter’s article would suggest that Democracy is a failure and that it is alright to suspend a constitution.

    No – you are obviously not saavy enough to grasp the satire of her point. She is pointing out the HYPOCRISY of the Democrats and the Anti-war left about whom they would support establishing a democracy versus their position against the fronts in Iraq and A’stan.

    In the end perhaps you could be right about Ron Paul’s foreign policy, but our cities are certainly not safer by being in Iraq.

    Perhaps. Hopefully we will never know. When our Marines found training videos and blueprints of our gradeschools and school busses at Al Qaeda training camps that they just liquidated in Iraq – hopefully that eliminated one such threat being plotted against our soil.

    Protecting our cities depends on our borders, not Iraq’s. I would much prefer to continue the implementation of conservative policies domestically and have a return to the constitution and protect our own country than to completely ignore our domestic issues while protecting someone else’s country.

    Here I agree with you. We cannot defend a nation with porous borders. We cannot defend our cities giving our drivers licenses to Illegals.

    If Ron Paul ran on his domestic platform with the same kind of Peace Through Strength and no-nonsense crack the balls of our enemies as Reagan and some of the GOP candidates running say they support – I would be supporting Ron Paul.

    His Non-Interventionism, pacifism, and Blame America First positions disqualify him for the role of CINC IMO.

    Let’s say Al-Qaeda did gain support in Iraq and took it over, wouldn’t that then give us the justification we need for destroying the entire place?

    That is about to happen in Pakistan. Would you support nuking Pakistan to glass?

    But if we were that worried about the danger to America we would have already attacked Iran.

    In 1979 – if we had smart leadership, and not a non-interventionist policy that Jimmy Carter had – that Ron Paul advocates today.

    Truth is – we are not in a position to be able to attack Iran – except by surgical strikes – and even that is in doubt when it comes to their nuke program.

    Iraq is decades away from having any capability to attack us and Iran is still not capable.

    Afghanistan was considered centuries away from being any kind of threat to America.

    What a difference 19 Jihadists with a death wish and boxcutters can do eh?

    Now imagine that same martyrdom mindset given nukes instead of boxcutters. It’s inevitable. It’s gonna happen.

    Human-guided smart missiles – no ICBMs needed.

    Then there’s merchant ships with Shahaab 3 launchers perhaps below decks. One 10 MGT warhead on top of a scud on a vessel five miles off the coast coming into port –

    They fire the scud – and perhaps they get sunk by a hellfire – but LA port goes brighter than the sun and we will never recover.

    In Iraq they can’t do anything to us.

    Except train and become armed to do what the videos and blueprints our Marines discovered revealed.

    I would prefer sealing the borders – expelling all foreign nationals, recreating an immigration system from scratch and nuking the mountains of Pakistan where Bin Laden is supposed to be – and warn the world – any Jihad attack on America or Americans anywhere in the world – we vaporize Mecca, and for every attack Jihadist’s commit – we will nuke you from afar – until you stop your 7th century barbaric crap – or you end up becomming extinct.

    Of course the world will oppose such soft speaking with the big club – and we have no willpower to actually do that. Since our enemies know we do not have the stomach or willpower to annihilate entire regions from the earth – we have to invade – hold ground and try to impose some kind of friendly government system there, and hope they grow to like us –

    Like the Japanese and Germans have learned to.

  95. EasyE

    “we have to invade – hold ground and try to impose some kind of friendly government system there, and hope they grow to like us”

    How is that every going to work? Imposition is anti-liberty, anti-freedom, and will never be accepted by the people being imposed upon. It didn’t work in Iran or Pakistan and it won’t work in Iraq. Imposing our definition of a friendly government will always fail. You can’t bring up Japan or Germany either because their societies were structured in a completely different way. They each had years of history as nations and for the most part were homogeneous, they had national unity. Our efforts there were focused on rebuilding infrastructure without having to deal with civil war. Iraq was cut out of the map by the British and is made up of groups that have been waring for centuries. It will be impossible for us to impose anything upon a country in which the populations violently detest each other. Outside of Germany and Japan our nation building efforts have focused mainly on keeping people in power that were friendly to the US but were no longer wanted by the people that they ruled over. That is direct opposition to democracy and freedom. So does America stand for liberty or not? Are we trying to spread democracy or impose it? And let’s not forget that we were actually attacked by Japan and Germany was actively try to take over the world and not just talking about it. Please look at history, for your children’s sake.

  96. invar

    And let’s not forget that we were actually attacked by Japan and Germany was actively try to take over the world and not just talking about it. Please look at history, for your children’s sake.

    Right – so let’s WAIT until AFTER Jihadists actually embark on attacks before reacting to their stated desire to take over the world.

    I think we’re done talking. I guess 9-11, the Cole, the Embassies – are all just neocon fairytales in your holy books of Ron Paul.

    You have certainly helped me remain content in my opposition to your guy.

  97. EasyE

    I never said they were fairytales, but ignoring their motives is living in a dreamworld.

    Read the Cato institute article and you might actually understand how we are interfering in the rest of the worlds business.

  98. invar

    The motive for global Jihad is militant Islam’s stated purpose.

    It’s amazing how something so simple from the mouths of those actually killing Americans and promising to kill Americans is routinely buried and discarded in a bunch of self-flagelleting “We caused all this” blame America pap.

    America=bad.

    World=good.

    Reminds me of how a simple notion of sin, can become so dismissed, justified, explained and given endless convoluted reasonings as to create a giant ‘gray area’ where there are no such things as right and wrong – and people beat themselves up for daring to judge good from evil – until today – we have no wisdom left us.

    Not even the wisdom to recognize that running home and leaving the world to do it’s own thing is going to result in the world crashing down our doors.

    Fine.

    I think I understand why Churchill was manically depressed.

  99. EasyE

    There you go again putting words in my mouth. I never said America was bad and I don’t excuse terrorism. But Iraq did not attack us.

    I am amazed at your ability to refuse to think instead of just reacting.

    Which terrorists on 9/11 were paid for or connected to Saddam Hussein in any way? When did Saddam attack the United States?

    I know he was a bad guy and I know that Islamic terrorism is killing people, but who are we going after? We are just getting killed while standing in the middle of a civil war in which no one wants us there. When will the war end? When will we admit that we have been interfering with the internal affairs of other nations for over a century? How can you come to the conclusion that interference has no consequence?

    I have never once claimed or believed that America deserved 9/11 or any other attack. But I am not retarded enough to believe that our actions around the world have no consequences.

    Isn’t that what we tell the liberals, “Life has consequences deal with them. The state isn’t there to bail you out of every bad move you make.” Well bring that to a global level. Are we supposed to bail out every country in the world for the bad moves they make and expect no consequences from the bad moves we make?

    Stop saying that I blame America. You have no serious way to refute me other than to claim that I blame America. Grow up and start thinking about things for a change instead of saying to yourself “Terrorist bad, terrorist Islamic, Islamic bad, kill Islam.” How about trying to put the entire thing into perspective, not assigning blame or guilt just causation. I don’t care if you still want to destroy the entire Muslim world but at least recognize the role that we have played in creating this mess in the world without assuming that everything American politicians do is saintly. To claim that all Islam is carrying out a Jihad against non Muslims is completely false. There are radicals that want to do this but there ranks have grown as a result of the manipulation and control they see exerted on their people by outside forces.

    For someone who claims to be a Christian, you certainly have a lot of hate and rage in your heart.

    “Ye have heard that it was said : ‘Eye for eye’ and ‘tooth for tooth.’ (39) But I tell you not to withstand him who is evil : but whoever strikes thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also : (40) and if anyone wishes to go to law with thee and take away thy tunic, let him have thy cloak also : (41) and whoever ‘impresses’ thee (to go) one mile, go two with him. (42) Give to him that asks of thee, and from him who wishes to borrow of thee, turn not away. (43) Ye have heard that it was said : ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.’ (44) But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (45) in order that ye may become sons of your Father who is in heaven, for He raises His sun on evil and good (alike) and rains upon righteous and unrighteous. (46) For if ye love (only) those who love you, what reward have ye? do not even the taxgatherers do the same? (47) and if ye greet your brothers only, what extra (thing) do ye do? do not even the gentiles do the same? (48) Ye then shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

    I love America and I am trying my best to save it from this terrible fate of perpetual war and economic destruction. I hope you are at least prepared for the rude awakening we are about to get in terms of our economic standing in the world and the resulting social collapse.

  100. invar

    Fine – you’re right.

    Going into Iraq was a mistake.

    Going into A’stan was a mistake.

    After 9-11 we should have apologized to the Jihadists for making them angry at us, and plead with them that we will do as they demand and leave all Arab lands immediately so as not to incur their wrath.

    We should then follow and pull out of the rest of the world immediately; close every US base down; mothball our armed forces so they no longer intimidate or frighten anyone; sit down with Iran, Syria, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad and have a nice tea over brunch and open free trade agreements with all of them.

    We should dump Israel and immediately declare them a hostile nation that has no right to be there and renounce neoconism as an evil greater than Nazism.

    We should then make a 3,000 foot “We’re Sorry” card to the world and make every neocon in America sign it before they get carted to camps while eeevil bad Christians like me should be forced to repent of “hating all Muslims” for daring to call Jihadism what it is – all before you boil us in tar for our “treason”.

    Be of good cheer. You are going to get the short term feel-good solution you think you want. And when you all cry aloud “Peace and Safety!” what comes immediately afterward will be on your own heads.

    As to your application of scripture – I have had PLENTY of Socialists toss that exact passage in my face as living proof Jesus was a Socialist and a Pacifist and if I were a “real Christian”, I would be too.

    So you’re certainly welcome to use it to portray where I stand on Jihadist Islam as some kind of sacriledge that proves I am no Christian.

    You are not the first, nor will you be the last to make such declarations.

    I happily accept them.

  101. EasyE

    You don’t get it at all. You have this all or nothing attitude. First off we should go after those responsible for 9/11 but we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq. If you can connect it to 9/11 then I will agree with you that we should be there, you got anything that I haven’t heard? We should protect our border but we shouldn’t be protecting an other country’s. We should have a strong military but we shouldn’t be extending it across the globe when the purpose of our military is to protect our own country not anyone else’s. We should be returning to the constitutional government that our founding fathers setup for us and start turning back the rampant socialism that has gone unchecked since the New Deal.

    Dump Israel? I didn’t even know we were dating. If Israel can’t protect itself then maybe they don’t deserve to be a country. We should dump Palestine too. It would only seem right that we should stop supporting both sides in that fight. And we shouldn’t declare them anything. The only thing we should be declaring in regards to any other countries is war or nothing at all. If Iran wants to talk some big game, let ’em. If India and Pakistan want to fight, let ’em. If Israel and Palestine want to fight, let ’em. If Mexico wants to take over the US by flooding us with illegal immigrants, well maybe we should do something about that.

    We should go back to worrying about ourselves rather than the rest of the world. The military is the way we keep America sovereign, it isn’t our tool for changing the world. The world is as it wants to be and we need to focus on what we want to be, not on what we think the rest of the world should be.

    And we don’t need trade “agreements” either. Maybe we should try this thing called free trade, where we buy from them what we want and they buy from us what they want. That way we both get something cheaper than what we’d get otherwise. But that only makes sense so we need to get the government involved because as every conservative knows, the government always knows best and the never make things more expensive.

    And how’s this for not bowing down to the terrorists. Why don’t we stop throwing money at every government that says, “Hey, we’ve got nukes, pay up suckers!”

    As far as your repenting goes, that’s up to you. I’m not for forcing anyone to do anything they don’t want to do, it wouldn’t be Christian. Unlike what I said above, the government doesn’t know best and it is usually dead wrong.

  102. invar

    You have this all or nothing attitude.

    I’m tired of arguing with people who think it’s Ron Paul or nothing.

    First off we should go after those responsible for 9/11 but we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq.

    As has been argued ad nauseum, we had more legal justification to go into Iraq than we had to go into A’stan, if nothing more – than for violating a 1991 Cease Fire that Iraq SIGNED.

    You keep talking about chess – but cannot comprehend the strategic reason for being in Iraq at all.

    This is not a nation-state war. It’s a religious war – THAT is the reality that the American people don’t want to grasp and refuse to consider.

    They want to think in terms of nation states, because that is what we are comfortable with.

    If you can connect it to 9/11 then I will agree with you that we should be there, you got anything that I haven’t heard?

    Bin Laden formally declared Jihad on the United States in 1998. We did nothing, even after he assisted Muslim’s in the Blackhawk Down massacre in Somalia, bombed two embassies, and nearly nearly sunk a naval ship before he got real lucky in 2001.

    Sadaam declared Jihad on the United States in 1999 after Clinton lobbed cruise missiles into Baghdad after Sadaam once again violated our Cease Fire and UN resolutions and kicked out weapons inspectors.

    I think after 9-11, anyone who declared Jihad on America got real close attention.

    Then there’s the plot to assasinate Bush Sr., his lighting up U.S. aircraft patrolling No-fly areas in Iraq after his massacre of the Shia for their failed coup we renegged on.

    Then there’s the WMDs that all of you are insistent he did not have – yet everyone from John Kerry to Clinton said he posessed and was developing in the late 1990’s. If you want to know where they are – ask Bassar Assad. If you want to know where Sadaam’s pre-1990 airforce is, ask Ahmadinejad. They are both caretakers of Sadaam’s war machine that was able to escape our destruction.

    Of course giving money to suicide bombers who successfully killed civilians in Israel doesn’t matter to you people, even though it was wargamed that he would try to get Palestinians to come to the U.S. and do the same thing upon the success of 9-11

    We should protect our border but we shouldn’t be protecting an other country’s.

    It’s going to be real fun when Al Qaeda and the Taliban take over Pakistan and Iran finishes weaponizing their uranium with all the Taepodong IIs that Syria and Iran have taken into inventory from North Korea.

    We’re going to learn it was a big mistake to think containing this problem did not need to extend beyond our own borders.

    We should have a strong military but we shouldn’t be extending it across the globe when the purpose of our military is to protect our own country not anyone else’s.

    How’s that $3.50 a gallon gas feeling to your wallet? Since you do not deem our interests of any importance, I’m sure you are not going to mind $10 a gallon gas in the near future.

    We should be returning to the constitutional government that our founding fathers setup for us and start turning back the rampant socialism that has gone unchecked since the New Deal.

    It took 60-plus years to get us to this point – even longer if you factor in the income tax graft in 1913.

    Our problem is not going to be fixed overnight – or with one man, or with one Administration – I don’t care if you people think Paul is God’s annointed one or not.

    Yanking the plug on the whole enchilada and starting over will kill the patient flat on the table, not to mention the bloodshed and rioting you are going to have when the Dependant class get’s mighty pissed off their entitlements are going to be scrapped.

    If Iran wants to talk some big game, let ‘em.

    Yeah. Europe said the same thing to Churchill about Hitler in the 1930’s too.

    If India and Pakistan want to fight, let ‘em.

    Nothing like radioactive clouds spreading across the globe to make a specatcular sunset in LA right?

    If Israel and Palestine want to fight, let ‘em.

    Okay – $90 a gallon gasoline.

    If Mexico wants to take over the US by flooding us with illegal immigrants, well maybe we should do something about that.

    Why? You are obviously a Racist and do not understand what true freedom is.

    We should go back to worrying about ourselves rather than the rest of the world.

    Methinks Coolidge and Roosevelt campaigned on similar ideas.

    Until the world came knocking down our doors.

    The military is the way we keep America sovereign, it isn’t our tool for changing the world.

    That’s funny, in an age of nukes, ICBMS and people willing to be suicide mules with a Student Visa.

    The world is as it wants to be and we need to focus on what we want to be, not on what we think the rest of the world should be.

    The world wants us gone and dead. You seem content to let them alone until they actually try and do it.

    How many dead American civilians are enough to warrant an act of war? 3,000? 300,000? 3 million?

    And we don’t need trade “agreements” either. Maybe we should try this thing called free trade, where we buy from them what we want and they buy from us what they want.

    Yeah, that’s right – Iran needs some uranium and we need some persian curry – LET’S TRADE!

    And how’s this for not bowing down to the terrorists. Why don’t we stop throwing money at every government that says, “Hey, we’ve got nukes, pay up suckers!”

    That’s funny – because that is exactly what Iran is going to be saying if anyone wants oil going through the Straits of Hormuuz. They’re convinced that because they were able to hold our embassy staff for 444 days – that they can blackmail America with nukes for at least that long.

    Unlike what I said above, the government doesn’t know best and it is usually dead wrong.

    The only thing you’ve said that I agree with.

  103. EasyE

    Your reply is full of interventionist polices, I thought we had a policy of non-intervention since 1979? You also mention the CIA info on WMD’s and everyone agreeing with it, but I thought you didn’t believe the CIA, that it is full of Clinton liberals and especially in their concept of blowback? And didn’t the CIA say that the might have had bad intelligence? What’s going on here, which side of your mouth are you talking out of? And how many times did you just mention gas and oil? Is this war over breaking U.N. resolutions, WMD’s that we payed for Saddam to create, a non-existent connection to 9/11, or oil?

    Our military uses more oil than anyone else in the world. Maybe if we stopped trying to police the world the oil price might actually come down. Then we could fill our strategic reserve and use it for it’s purpose instead of playing political games by releasing it to the public for temporary gas price relief.

    If Assad and Ahmadinejad have Saddam’s weapons why aren’t we going after them right now? It was all the justification we needed for going after Saddam. Is this a double standard or a farce?

  104. invar

    I thought we had a policy of non-intervention since 1979?

    In regards to Iran and dealing with Jihadists head-on, Yup.

    You also mention the CIA info on WMD’s and everyone agreeing with it, but I thought you didn’t believe the CIA, that it is full of Clinton liberals and especially in their concept of blowback?

    You know what’s funny? The very people who in the late 1990’s were warning about Sadaam’s WMDs, and cited the CIA reports, are now the same people who tell us Sadaam never had them and that the CIA reports are bogus.

    Except of course a few of us remember the Iran/Iraq War and Halabja. Sadaam USED what everyone NOW says he never had. Then we have the testimony of defected Iraqi nationals who were actually WORKING on Sadaam’s nuke and WMD programs. But of course we must ignore those people and suggest they are Bushbot plants because to take them at their word – well that would deflate the giant balloon you people live under.

    I prefer to assume the worst of our enemies instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt like you people do.

    And didn’t the CIA say that the might have had bad intelligence?

    How would the CIA know a damn thing? They were apparently about as trustworthy as Baghdad Bob. They were gutted of field agents in the 1990’s and replaced with political officers. It’s all politics for them, just as it is for the politicians who want power and control, except elected politicans come and go – Alphabets remain forever.

    One has to dig through everything from the IAEA/UNESCO reports, Sadaam’s own words and actions, history, the foreign intelligence, and those who actually worked on Sadaam’s weaponry to get a decent understanding.

    Regardless – as I said – Sadaam violated the 1991 Cease Fire Agreement. That alone was all the real justification we needed to send Schwartzkopf and the boys into Baghdad in 1993 and made Iraq a US Territory back then.

    Is this war over breaking U.N. resolutions, WMD’s that we payed for Saddam to create, a non-existent connection to 9/11, or oil?

    It’s about establishing a beach head in the ME to eradicate a nest of Jihadism that is at war with America and the West whether we want to cope with that fact or not, whether any of us want to admit that or not. It does not matter whether or not you think we should or should not be at war over there. What matters is that Jihadists are unequivocally at war with us.

    You can ignore that and pretend like your messiah that if we just sit down and talk and trade fissile materials for trinkets – that they will treat us nice and like us again.

    The real world does not operate on the rules of the sandbox your mother laid down. But you can pretend to yourself that they do.

    Our military uses more oil than anyone else in the world. Maybe if we stopped trying to police the world the oil price might actually come down.

    Well hell’s bells! By that reckoning – let’s just get rid of the military altogether since they are the biggest users of it and you will have more oil for yourself! End of problem yes??

    Then we could fill our strategic reserve and use it for it’s purpose instead of playing political games by releasing it to the public for temporary gas price relief.

    Listen up clueless, we do not drill for our own oil – so we have no way to get enough of it unless we import it or shut the Environazis and the courts up. Good luck doing that.

    Then, it would not matter if we had two hundred trillion gallons in our reserve. We have not built a new refinery in this country since 1976 and it will take a minimum of 10 years to get one built – if at all with all the red tape, impact studies and palms to grease in the area of a BILLION dollars before one shovel is used to break ground for one.

    So unfortunately – thanks to our Gaia worship and zeal to keep property values inflated without having a refinery in the area – we’re stuck being dependent on imported oil and gas. The flow of which at market prices is the engine of our economy.

    Meanwhile the real world marches on, while we wax idealistic on how things would be so much better if we simply pretend we are all alone on this rock, or play nice with despots and terrorists.

    If Assad and Ahmadinejad have Saddam’s weapons why aren’t we going after them right now?

    And risk another 9-11 Truther documentary about how America is worse than Nazi Germany??

    God forbid!

    I gues maybe some think like you people do – and are willing to wait until they are actually used to kill Americans before we respond in any way.

    All I want to know is how many millions have to die before you people wake up to the fact we have a serious problem that needed to be confronted by force a long time ago?

    My guess is what I’ve already heard from you people – that America is invincible – and it is not possible for anyone to harm the U.S. unless the government allows them to.

    It was all the justification we needed for going after Saddam. Is this a double standard or a farce?

    Politics and a lack of resolve and understanding what we are up against. Thanks for demonstrating.

  105. EasyE

    Supporting Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war was not interfering with Iran?

    So which is it you believe the CIA or you don’t? You’ve given reason for both sides.

    It’s all politics for [the CIA], just as it is for the politicians who want power and control.

    Wouldn’t this be validation for electing someone who doesn’t play politics, like Ron Paul.

    Well hell’s bells! By that reckoning – let’s just get rid of the military altogether since they are the biggest users of it and you will have more oil for yourself! End of problem yes??

    If anyone is an extremist it’s you. I don’t think we should ever get rid of the military. I just don’t think we should have it spread around the world. You need to chill a bit on your exaggerations and please stop implying things that I haven’t.

    It’s about establishing a beach head in the ME to eradicate a nest of Jihadism that is at war with America and the West whether we want to cope with that fact or not, whether any of us want to admit that or not.

    So it wasn’t about liberating Iraq? It wasn’t about WMD’s? The last I knew the terrorists that perpetrated 9/11 were individuals not working for a government but being protected by one. We went to war against them and turned our sites away to remove the only check on Iranian power in the ME. So it was really all just a setup to let Iran gain enough power in the ME to challenge us, and then we would have the justification to war with them as well??? As awesome as that sounds I still think we should have done a better job of taking care of the people who perpetrated 9/11. Picking a fighting with Iran on their home turf before they’ve even shot at us sounds a little presumptuous. I like the idea of the military coming home and protecting our homes, not some Arabs and the majority of the military agrees with me.

    Listen up clueless, we do not drill for our own oil – so we have no way to get enough of it unless we import it or shut the Environazis and the courts up. Good luck doing that.

    Then, it would not matter if we had two hundred trillion gallons in our reserve.

    What are you trying to say? I was implying that the purpose of the strategic reserve is military. We shouldn’t tap into it every time gas prices go up. I never said anything about importing oil, of course we have to do that. So, “listen up clueless.” The rest of the world is starting to use more oil to. So pretty soon the supply isn’t going to meet demand. If that happens it doesn’t matter what we do in Iran. If we took over their entire oil industry it wold only buy us a few more years before we have to start getting energy elsewhere, coal maybe? And we would probably selling the oil on the world market like Iran does now, so really it wouldn’t buy us anytime. Like I was saying the strategic reserve is there for the military to use in times that oil is difficult to procure, i.e. the near future.

    My guess is what I’ve already heard from you people – that America is invincible – and it is not possible for anyone to harm the U.S. unless the government allows them to. Politics and a lack of resolve and understanding what we are up against. Thanks for demonstrating.

    So it’s a farce then, because what I thought we were up against was a band of terrorists, that we had given weapons to so that they could fight the Soviets, most of whom came from Saudi Arabia, our undemocratic ally. And now they are probably hiding in Pakistan, our undemocratic ally. Instead we are in Iraq where our past ally had power. Looking after their civil war and in-fighting, as we plan an invasion of another past ally, where the very intervention that we claim not to be involved in, had gotten the people to oust the guy we wanted for a guy we didn’t. While a little further to the west we are supporting both sides of another conflict. Yes, it is all a silly farce.

  106. invar

    So which is it you believe the CIA or you don’t?

    I believe what our enemies say and do, because unlike our idiot alphabets playing politics – Jihadists are attempting to make good on what they say they are going to do.

    Wouldn’t this be validation for electing someone who doesn’t play politics, like Ron Paul.

    No. He’s is as inherently dangerous as CINC as Hillary – and from the sounds of it – twice as stupid.

    Your messiah has been a politician for over 20 years, so you would be duped beyond measure to assume he doesn’t know how to play politics.

    If anyone is an extremist it’s you.

    Fine. Good. I’m glad you think so.

    I don’t think we should ever get rid of the military. I just don’t think we should have it spread around the world.

    When the world starts acting and behaving like civilized nations on their own without us having to sacrifice thousands of boys every generation to stop some nutballs hell bent on global conquest – I will agree with you.

    Not until then.

    You need to chill a bit on your exaggerations and please stop implying things that I haven’t.

    I’m addressing your entire mob’s mentality, keeping in mind the ad nauseum talking points they repeat as vociferously as the Code Pink nuts do.

    So it wasn’t about liberating Iraq?

    Is Iraq liberated from Sadaam’s regime right now or isn’t it?

    It wasn’t about WMD’s?

    What part of my citing UNESCO, the IAEA, Kerry, Clinton, defected Iraqis working on the WMDs are you not able to comprehend – or does all of that so fly in the face of your constructed reality that you think it better to just discount it all?

    Kind of like Tokyo Rosie O’Donnell who is convinced fire cannot melt or soften steel – despite the evidence presented to the contrary?

    The last I knew the terrorists that perpetrated 9/11 were individuals not working for a government but being protected by one.

    There’s your problem right there. You people want to keep seeing what happened on 9-11 as just a few criminal rogues who got lucky rather than an ideological movement spanning nations and peoples that has some of it’s roots in Nazi Germany. It’s a major reason why Ron Paul is a clueless kook when it comes to his absurd idea of applying the antiquated idea of Letters of Marque and reprisal (never mind that Congress made that practice illegal) to Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad et. al.

    So it was really all just a setup to let Iran gain enough power in the ME to challenge us, and then we would have the justification to war with them as well???

    You certainly have a reading comprehension problem. The reason we did not let Schwartzkopf go all the way to Baghdad in ’91 was for that exact reason.

    9-11 changed our thinking and brought us painfully into the new reality that Jihadist Islam had grown large and bold enough to directly challenge the U.S. through assymetric guerilla warfare.

    Picking a fighting with Iran on their home turf before they’ve even shot at us sounds a little presumptuous.

    What part of Ahmadinejad’s promises to destroy the Great Satan, “burn American cities to the ground” and “Wipe Israel off the map” do you fail to grasp?

    The guy is making NUKES while making pronouncements about what he is going to do with them once they have them.

    Clear it up any for you – or would a nice Dr. Seuss drawing help you understand the obvious?

    When Hitler was building up the Reich he also wrote and spoke about what he was going to do to Europe and the Jews – the world paid him no mind and pulled the same pacifist crap you people and Ron Paul are insisting.

    I’ll be damned I support a guy and his mob who will allow history to repeat itself with nukes.

    I like the idea of the military coming home and protecting our homes

    You mean like they were able to on 9-11? Some solace when Saleed’s Pizza Delivery manages to get a truck with a nasty device to a target some bright sunny morning and creates another sunrise over an American city.

    Lots of good the military sitting at home is going to do us.

    besides, what part of Posse Commitatus do you also not understand?

    We shouldn’t tap into it every time gas prices go up.

    The public screams for gimme-gimme relief have a bigger impact on politicans than national security.

    If we took over their entire oil industry it wold only buy us a few more years before we have to start getting energy elsewhere, coal maybe?

    Not if the Environazis, the Global Warming zealots and their buddies on the Court get their way. They are working to block the building of a coal-plant in our region and so far the court agrees with their petition and put a stop to the plans for now.

    Like I was saying the strategic reserve is there for the military to use in times that oil is difficult to procure, i.e. the near future.

    I think we can agree together that the general public by and large does not give a rat’s behind about anyone but themselves. As long as they have beer, cable, cheap gas and iPod shows to download – they are indifferent to everything else.

    Until reality comes to bite down hard and everyone is in sudden shock and unable to cope.

    So it’s a farce then

    You go ahead and think that. I’m sure it helps you sleep better with your choice of devotion.

    I’m sure our enemies will want us to believe it’s a farce too. After all, the best way for an enemy and the devil to defeat someone is to make them believe they do not exist.

    I thought we were up against was a band of terrorists

    We’re up against a religious ideology – this has been stated many times. You just choose to ignore that reality.

    Go, support your savior.

    We’re all going to wake up one day and realize the reality of what you choose to believe a farce, and wish to God we had not made such a stupid mistake.

    But then, it will be too late.

    When you guys get your wish, and we do a Somalia, what will follow is going to lie on your own heads. You were warned, by no less than our enemies and by some of your fellow countrymen whom you hate more than those who chant for our deaths every week .

  107. EasyE

    “So it wasn’t about liberating Iraq?

    Is Iraq liberated from Sadaam’s regime right now or isn’t it?

    It wasn’t about WMD’s?

    What part of my citing UNESCO, the IAEA, Kerry, Clinton, defected Iraqis working on the WMDs are you not able to comprehend – or does all of that so fly in the face of your constructed reality that you think it better to just discount it all?

    Kind of like Tokyo Rosie O’Donnell who is convinced fire cannot melt or soften steel – despite the evidence presented to the contrary?

    You obviously missed my point because I asked those questions in response to your statement:

    It’s about establishing a beach head in the ME to eradicate a nest of Jihadism that is at war with America and the West

    This would indicate that the point wasn’t WMD’s or Saddam, wouldn’t it?

    The guy is making NUKES while making pronouncements about what he is going to do with them once they have them.

    Where are there nukes? The IAEA, which you cited for your support says that they have no evidence that they are developing weapons. Everything they’ve done thus for is perfectly suitable for power generation, whether that is their final intent or not, I don’t know and neither do you.

    You mean like they were able to on 9-11? Some solace when Saleed’s Pizza Delivery manages to get a truck with a nasty device to a target some bright sunny morning and creates another sunrise over an American city.

    So please tell me again how 9/11 happened because I don’t think what we are doing now in Iraq is going to stop Saleed. If you could tell me how we stop Saleed by being in Iraq then I’ll switch sides right now. Perhaps the money we save on policing the world could better be spent looking for Saleed here.

    “We shouldn’t tap into [the strategic reserve] every time gas prices go up.

    The public screams for gimme-gimme relief have a bigger impact on politicans than national security.

    You’ve again given another reason to vote for Ron Paul, a man who has a backbone and doesn’t fold under political pressure when he knows something is right even when his view isn’t popular. Personally I’m proud that a man like that can still exist in America today.

    After all, the best way for an enemy and the devil to defeat someone is to make them believe they do not exist.

    Oh I know they exist, I just don’t think we are not going about things in the right way at all.

  108. invar

    Where are there nukes? The IAEA, which you cited for your support says that they have no evidence that they are developing weapons.

    You obviously do not keep up with the news:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/14/wiran114.xml

    This is from a year ago:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111400230_pf.html

    Everything they’ve done thus for is perfectly suitable for power generation,

    So now you’re a propaganda minister for Ahmadinejad and his fellow Mullahs.

    Okay Bob. We wondered where you went to after we set up shop in Baghdad.

    whether that is their final intent or not, I don’t know and neither do you.

    When Ahmadinejad says that the Great Satan will soon be destroyed, and the Hidden Imam will come forth to lead all Islam to victory over Israel and the Infidels of the world; when he says American cities will “Burn in the rage of the Muslim peoples” – what part of those almost weekly pronouncements from this guy makes his intentions “unknown” to you???

    If you could tell me how we stop Saleed by being in Iraq then I’ll switch sides right now.

    Instead of Jihadists taking a flight to LaGuardia – they are taking a crowded van to Tikrit.

    And, as my nephew said (who was in the sand box there) – “Sending them to meet Allah here by my hand is better than letting them send themselves at home by theirs”.

    If that’s not good enough a reason, nothing for you will be.

    This is ultimately going nowhere.

    I’m not going to vote for Ron Paul, nor his stupid foreign policy ideas if he was the only candidate running.

    If it’s him versus Hillary – I’m voting for whomever might be on the CP ticket – or I’ll vote just for my local offices.

    Your death-threatening fellow Mob RP supporters have seen to that. You couldn’t PAY me to vote for him at this point.

    But you will.

    Good for you.

    So we’ve come to the end of the discussion.

  109. Justaman

    invar,

    I’m curious as to who you’d like to see be President.

    so I’ll just ask you,

    Which of all the Presidential canidates currently
    running, would you want to see as President,
    and vote for?

  110. invar

    I have no preference for president at this point – I’m disappointed or disgusted by the entire lot of candidates running.

    Tancredo and Huckabee have no chance in hell to win the nomination. As usual, we will have our choice of liberal bluebloods, crackpots, rabid Socialists or one wannabe Queen to choose from.

  111. nah, you’re right man. christians believe in convert and destroy. like most religions minus buddhists and uh…hmm….um…..pagans maybe?

    you know what’s funny? you people call paul an isolationist? so an isolationist is one who does not invade other countries, kill the innocent, rape the female inhabitants of the invaded country, and make the children piss themselves seconds before a bomb lands on their ass?

    yeah you haven’t seen the videos huh? you need to do some research. find the one where brit soldiers beat the shit out of children. or another where an iraqi is going to work and for fun the americans off him in the back as he runs away from his fired upon car.

    you don’t get it do you? there is going to be a civil war in our own country once this election is rigged once more and h.r. 1955 is instituted.

    so remain in your bubble because you lack the courage to fight and die for the peace of the innocent. by the way, your jesus is a myth which you can relate to pagans, egyptions, and greeks. so do me a favor. stop believing what you read and find the real people that can give you the real answers.

    you’re a product of media brainwashing. i guess in the same sense you can say that i’ve been brainwashed by people who have come out of the military with stories of rape, murder, and the decapitation of children done by your wonderful american soldiers.

    so live another eternity of war. useful people will die in order for you to keep your comfortable life meanwhile useless people such as yourself will remain here protected by those who monitor your compliance.

    just in case you believe your government does no wrong, here is some homework.
    look up rockefeller, nazis, prescott bush, 1933, gulf of tonkin, cambodia, killing fields, vietnam, opium, cia…you can start with that.

    i wish there was some sort of judge that can decipher who is educated, informed, and who isn’t. then take those are ignorant and teach them the truth of authoritarianism.

    but instead there’s something else. no god, no jesus, no allah, no peter, no paul, no mary. just sufferring in the physical world created by your kind. those who lack in compassion. however i have to admit i’m far from compassionate. i want those who are corrupt, those who murder and take advantage of the innocent for their own selfish desires.

    here is my fate:
    “It is an attempt at legislative lobotomy of conscience. It aims to eviscerate ethical sensibilities of an entire culture.

    Having usurped the power of war and peace, life and death, the Corporatocracy now bludgeons even the thought of speaking for conscience. This is State murder of the mind.

    Here is yours:
    “(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.”

    “(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions.”

    Section 899D of the bill establishes a Center for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. This will be an institution affiliated with the Department of Homeland Security. It will study and determine how to detain thought criminals.

  112. correction:
    “however i have to admit i’m far from compassionate. i want those who are corrupt, those who murder and take advantage of the innocent for their own selfish desires….to die”

  113. John

    It is rare you see a politician stand up for philosophical principal when most would just repeat popular opinion. Senator Dr. Ron Paul is the most honest and consistent politician I have ever seen. Ron Paul speaks the truth, and is a true American.

  114. NOPE

    I think you are a bit sick because you don’t make sense. You need to see a psychiatrist before you explode…
    Sad old man.

  115. michael

    I never herd of moveon.org but apparently the author failed to look them up as well
    Moveon.org Independent Expenditures
    What are Independent Expenditures and Communications Costs?

    Election cycle: 2010 2008 2006 2004 2002
    Independent Expenditures, Communication Costs and Coordinated Expenses as of July 13, 2009:
    Total For Democrats: $5,202,335
    Total Against Democrats: $0
    Total For Republicans: $0
    Total Against Republicans: $1,447,000

    Candidate Office Total For Against
    Begich, Mark (D-AK) Senate $1,074 $1,074 $0
    Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) Senate $7,371 $7,371 $0
    Edwards, Donna (D-MD) House $152,120 $152,120 $0
    Edwards, John (D) President $8,342 $8,342 $0
    Franken, Al (D-MN) Senate $1,074 $1,074 $0
    Giuliani, Rudolph W (R) President $140,844 $0 $140,844
    Hagan, Kay R (D-NC) Senate $25,926 $25,926 $0
    Kissell, Larry (D-NC) House $1,932 $1,932 $0
    Kucinich, Dennis J (D-OH) House $6,400 $6,400 $0
    Martin, James Francis (D-GA) Senate $1,074 $1,074 $0
    McCain, John (R) President $1,056,915 $0 $1,056,915
    McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) Senate $249,241 $0 $249,241
    Merkley, Jeff (D-OR) Senate $7,026 $7,026 $0
    Noriega, Rick (D-TX) Senate $1,074 $1,074 $0
    Obama, Barack (D) President $4,988,922 $4,988,922 $0

    I support Ron Paul because of his voting record!

  116. Inwar, friend!

    My Christian buddies know that Islamo-fascism is an imminent threat and must be thwarted with any-means-necessary! All Muslims are absolutely, without a doubt, going to rape, murder, and behead Americans (if they don’t convert to Islam and follow Sharia Law)! These yellow-bellied isolationist cowards have no idea that they will stop at nothing to destroy us, so it’s only rational that we destroy them in anyway possible. If it means we have to torture to get important information, fine. Even if it means we have to eradicate Muslim women and children! God’s work we must completed, regardless of our feelings about killing the weak and young; they’re either supporting terrorism or going to become jihadists, so it’s important we get them all.

    Quite frankly, nuking them seems the best option. Save for Kabul and other major cities, we should turn the whole place to glass. The land is full of sinful reprobates, so let’s send them back to Allah (Satan). After that we can focus on the Arabs in our own country. We detained those Japs in internment camps, so let’s do one better: Cage the Arabs, then throw’em into the ovens, all of them. Lock them up, gas them, then turn’em into ashes; men, women, and children.

    We need a Final Solution against Islamo-fascism, period! If that means a draft, so be it. A war tax, fine. Shoot all traitors that desert then sort the mess out when it’s all over. It’s your duty as an American to fight these demons, so enroll now, and wear the holy-armor of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

  117. invar

    You’re no friend of mine.

    And obviously – this is just a stupid attempt on your part to try and paint Christians with the same brush as Jihadists.

    Interesting you would post this on a Ron Paul thread where his pacifism and idiocy on foreign policy has been noted and exposed.

    But this is what you Mob Zombies like to try and convince everyone that we are like – no different than Al Qaeda.

    Not going to bite pal.

  118. True conservative

    This article is terrible. Unbelievably irrational. You have absolutely no idea what it means to be a true conservative. If halfwits like you remain in power, the entire global economy will be destroyed. You endorse a ridiculously irresponsible foreign policy, one that real conservatives have NEVER believed in.
    You’re a joiner. You like to join groups and convince yourself that you are “moral” and are “doing god’s work”. That’s fine. But please stay out of politics. Go do some charity work. Help out at church collections, etc. Pushing these radical, dangerous political positions, simply because of your joiner mentality, may make you feel good about yourself and make you feel special, but you are putting our nation in a lot of danger. If we start too many more undeclared, pre-emptive wars, we may be setting ourselves up for a truly global conflict. If the United States is ever forced to sign its own Versailles-esque treaty, militant imbeciles like you will get the blame.

    Neo-cons, imperialists, keynesians, and corporato-socialists are NOT conservatives.

    It seems you like getting involved and standing up for what you believe in, which is great. But I suggest you get involved in something that takes quite a bit less thought.

    BTW, there is no “Islamo-fascist” conspiracy to take over the world and turn everyone into Muslims.
    Read a damn book.

  119. invar

    BTW, there is no “Islamo-fascist” conspiracy to take over the world and turn everyone into Muslims.

    Right, and Satan wants everyone to think he doesn’t exist either.

    5th Columnist Jihad-appeasement stooges like yourself are nothing but sabateurs, who think you can fool everyone into redefining Conservatism means.

    You don’t fool me.

  120. Pingback: Message to Ron Paul and the Paulbots: You’re as Nutty as a Squirrel Turd « The Foxhole

  121. dave

    Your religion is not real, moron. Get over it.

  122. invar

    No dave, YOU are not real. Get over your self importance.

  123. Linda Hanna

    Please update this article. It’s great but needs to be brought current. I have more than a few Ron Paul supporters who need to read it but will discount it due to 2007 date. Thanks, and if you do, please e-mail to me. I’d like to link it to my FB page.

  124. invar

    Well Linda, even though the original post was from 2007 – the one thing we have learned in 4 years, is that Ron Paul is consistent.

    He is consistent on where he is correct about our economy and currency, and he is just as consistent with being a complete lunatic nutcase in matters of self defense and foreign policy.

    His recent comments in the debate about Iran cement and validate what many of us said about him in 2007-2008.

    I really do not care if his whacko supporters discount the article, because to me – they are no different than those Marxists and Useful idiots in the DNC who worship Obama. There is no point reasoning with the insane.

    The Ron Paul Mob zombies – supported by Leftists who hate the military are in truth, no different than the Marxists. Both of them see their guy as a political savior.

    I refuse to trade one supporter-lofted wannabe king for another.

    If you review Ron Paul’s idiotic comments during the last debate with all the entries posted at this blog, you will find that nothing has changed except that a career-politician once again is running to be in the top spot.

    Ron Paul is the epitome of a RINO. He’s a Libertarian who has to run as a Republican because that is the only way he can win an election.

    We already are suffering one fraud who ran as a Democrat who was in reality an America-hating Marxist. We do not need another fraud running as a Republican/Conservative who is in reality a Blame-America First Libertarian Isolationist.

  125. A Patriot

    I have to say, good article. I actually went through and read all the comments, and it merely proves the lunacy of Ron Paul and his Paulbots. As someone who identifies partically as a libertarian, I want nothing to do with someone who is incapable of executing his primary responsibility as president – CINC of the US army. I used to like Paul, but found out the truth about him – his isolationist stance, his left-wing supporters, the mob of Paulbots, and his utter ignorance towards the very real threat of raidcal Islamasism and jihad. He will never get any support from me again.

  126. TS Hayes

    Wonder how you rectify the fact that Ron Paul receives more donations from the military than any other candidate – including President Obama. Are these folk anti-American nut bags as well?

  127. invar

    Lots of military folks voted for Obama also. Ignorance, indifference and plain stupidity are not limited to the general emoting public. And with more homos being celebrated in the military, Jihadists being promoted in the military to go shoot up American bases on our soil, I frankly don’t care if 100% of of lunatic Ron Paul’s donations came from the military. It’s not going to change the fact that Ron Paul IS an anti-semitic, pacifist nutball who has no business in the Oval Office. He’s a professional career politician no different than the rest of the power-hungry lot of them are, and this is his third run for the top spot.

    As such – he’s disqualified himself on that alone in my estimation, not to mention his clueless ignorance of foreign policy and militant Islam makes him more than unfit for office.

    He will never get my vote, or support. NEVER.

  128. Loki

    It is rare to find a ZIONIST DOUCHEBAG such as you. I pray you testical cancer so that you may never procreate.

  129. Honorably Discharged

    this apparently is a syop operation guess what Ron Paul is winning and the New Workd Order is going dwon the toiket where it belongs……If we the people of this Nation rise up you will all find yourselfs standing before the gallows for Treason and Conspiracy to over throw these United States

  130. invar

    And this comment from a seriously whacked-out psychopath that seems to make up a large number of Ron Paul cultists, is the continuing evidence and proof of my contention that the Ron Paul Worshipers are even more dangerous and delusional than the goose-stepping Marxist Welfare Army of Obama.

    The Mob Zombie mantra: If you do not worship Ron Paul as the only savior of this nation, then you are guilty of treason and should be killed.

    They want a blood letting as assuredly as the race-baiting Marxist pimps for the welfare class do. Which is why Ron Paul’s crazy mob zombies might be more dangerous to anyone who dares disagree with them than the Agenda bent of the Marxist Left.

    Might as well call the Ron Paul cultists what they are: Ron Paul’s Brownshirt’s.

    I have a warning for you blood-lusters out there eager to string up all of us who disagree with your political messiah; we’re waiting for you to make that last mistake. Might want to check up on the stats for firearms and ammo sales of late. Some of us are awake on the watchtower.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s