Ron Paul - our next John McCain only worse

I'm so sick of this guy and his groupies. He's a blame america first leftist, with some conservative fiscal beliefs. That's really all there is to him.

Like McCain did, he's now going after conservatives in an attempt to get the left leaning media on his side. He's recently gone after Perry for saying Bernanke was "almost treasonous" for printing money, which I tend to agree with, but trust me this is only the beginning from Paul.

The only difference is, McCain wasn't an america hater / blamer like this guy. But both betrayed their parties and becoming useful idiots for the left. McCain seems to be coming around now that the media lost their use for him and spit him out. So long as Paul keeps blaming america for everything, he'll be useful much longer.

 

What the heck does "blame America leftist" mean? You honestly think Ron Paul is a "leftist"?

Some conservative fiscal beliefs? He's the most "fiscally conservative" out of all of them.

 

Ron Paul and McNuts are polar opposites.

They don't even sit in the same ballpark.

This thread is fail.

 

Paul is a non-interventionalist. That doesn't equal America-Hater.

In foreign policy, McCain was an obvious Hawk and Paul is not anti-war, but rather non-interventialist.

It's a philosophical difference.


It seems to me that since you're comparing Paul to McCain that you're afraid that he will win the nomination. I wouldn't be too worried about that.

 

You seem to think that everyone who fairly criticizes American Foreign Policy is an "America Hater."

 

Is this just another ill informed political rant? Was the linked story actually read? The OP obviously reflects a complete lack of knowledge about Ron Paul.

When has Ron Paul ever expressed any hatred for America? Of course many of the things that Ron Paul says are highly accurate. For example the US was attacked by Islamic terrorists because of US interventionism in the Middle East. There is no disputing this as even the NIE (national intelligence estimate) established this to be a fact. Perhaps having a politican that actually tells the truth is what's unacceptable.

As far as the story it wasn't Ron Paul that accused Bernanke of being "almost treacherous or treasonous” was it? While Ron Paul has consistantly opposed the Federal Reserve it's the "Johnny-come-lately's" like Perry and Bachmann that have no history of opposing the Federal Reserve jumping on the Ron Paul policy bandwagon. As Paul stated they're more about lip-service than showing any record of actually opposing the Federal Reserve.

Of course Ron Paul and John McCain have little in common at all as far as political policy goes. McCain was always a "big government and ignore the Constitution" politican while Paul was always "small government and follow the Constitution" politican.

 

It means there is no different between Ron Paul and Noam Chomsky or even Reverend Wright. All of them and their followers deny being american haters, but they all blame america first. If there is a difference between Ron Paul and these others, please tell me what it is. Give you me on argument you can defend Ron Paul with that you couldn't also use to defend the others.

 

More to the point, in 2008, Ron Paul blamed america for the 9/11 attack in the republican primary debate. You see this goes much further than Paul merely having a noninterventionist foreign policy. He's under the impression that we are to blame, that we are causing the attacks by our policies. Sounds like Reverend Wright to me. Giuliani was so amazed with the comment he gave Paul a chance to withdraw it, but he refused and kept hammering away. This is not merely a noninterventionist. This is a leftist.

 

First of all...this info is easily verifiable...Ron Paul has NEVER voted to raise taxes, NEVER voted to go to war...returns a portion of his congressional budged to the Treasury every year, declined the lucrative pension congress voted for themselves...lobbyists don't even bother going to his ofice, they already know the answer...IF you are listening to mainstreammedia, I suggest you do some more research...mainstream are bought and paid for by their advertisers, do what they are told which is to minimize Ron Paul as much as possible...why do ya think they laugh at him and put him in the worst light imaginable? The Bilderbergers and moneyed powerful (of which Rick Perry was an attendee in 2007) have elected our presidents for a long time through the mainstream media....as long as we continue to do the same ol same ol the "business as usual" will continue to go in Washington. Ron Paul has been predicting the mess we are in right now for years and was dismissed as a kook...now, the politicians are trying to figure out how to get us out of this mess....politics begin on the local and state level....let me assure ya our texas congressmen won't even mention Ron Paul's name, they keep touting Perry cause they know what Perry is all about and they WANT the same ol same ol "business as usual" in Washington. They DON'T WANT their congressional budgets cut which is likely to happen if Ron Paul were elected and sent his budget to them....yes, I'm a native Texan and yes, I'm a Ron Paul supporter....I want smaller government....I want regulations on business reduced so our jobs can come back home...I want the troops home so they can be put on the border....why don't yall watch some speeches other than on mainstream media....we don't hate America, we love America, we are frightened of what the politicians have done which is sold out the American people.

 

I fail to see how what this has to do with the OP.

 

What's that? you want more evidence.

Paul wants Iran to have nukes.

“Just think of how many nuclear weapons surround Iran,” said Paul. “The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there. All these countries … Why wouldn’t it be natural if they might want a weapon? Internationally, they might be given more respect. Why should we write people off?”

Paul says we should have left OBL alone out of respect for Pakistan.

He stated that that the Navy SEAL raid on Bin Laden’s hideout in Pakistan “was absolutely not necessary.” Why? Because of the violation (alleged) of Pakistani sovereignty. Paul asked rhetorically ”What if he [Osama] had been in a hotel in London?”

Paul justified OBL's attacks on America

....when asked by Tim Russert, “How have we, the United States, provoked al-Qaeda?” Paul responded: “Well, read what the lead—the ringleader says. Read what Osama bin Laden said. We had, we had a base, you know, in Saudi Arabia that was an affront to their religion, that was blasphemy as far as they were concerned.”

Paul claims to be like Reagan, but in actuality denounced Reagan in '88. Bet you guys didn't know that.

In fact, when Russert asked Dr. Paul about a 1988 statement made by Paul against Reagan, when Paul had proclaimed, “I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan administration,” the congressman didn’t back off. Paul declared Reagan had been “a failure.”

All of these excerpts are from this article:
Ron Paul: The GOP’s Henry Wallace

 

The mainstream media does what it wants to do, which is usually to focus on things that are more interesting than an uncharismatic person like Ron Paul, who would be disintegrated on the debate podium if he went up against Obama.

If you would like to discredit the New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, and CNN, go ahead. And if you think that your local Texas news sources are going to be less biased than any nationally acclaimed journalistic heavyweight, well... I'm really not sure what to tell you. Even as a liberal, I would prefer measuring my political views against Fox News instead of using my city paper as a thermometer to gauge the health of the entire country.

 

OP failed hard.

Ron Paul was against Bush's Socailist bailouts, while other republicans rushed to vote with it.

 

What if Iran has nukes? What might happen? You think they will nuke the United States? You honestly think that would happen? The country who has murdered the most innocent civilians with nukes is the United States....yet we need to fear Iran because you don't agree with their leader? Rofl.

Lots of countries considered GWB to be a war criminal. What if a spec op's team from one of those countries raided Texas and killed GWB? How would you feel about America's sovereignty?

When you poke a hornet's nest with a stick long enough you should expect to get stung once or twice.

Reagan was a failure. Whats your point? You think because Fox tells you he is not a failure, or some pundit on Fox thinks he is great that means its true?

 

Take note, RP supporters. This is the company you keep. Dumb enough to believe Iran wouldn't use their nukes on Israel or the US. Supports Pakistan's hiding of OBL. Blames america for all foreign attacks and hates Reagan. I just want to be clear, this is the type of people that support this weasel.

 

I really don't care if Israel gets attacked...that is for them to figure out, not us.

Here is the problem I have with folks like yourself,

You are obviously what you would describe as "small government". You support a smaller domestic government. You want the government out of your life and you want to make your own decisions. Yet you dont want that for anyone outside of our country. You want to invade and attack and impose what you feel to be the best way of life on anyone you percieve as a threat or perhaps going in the wrong direction. You are against welfare and think that domestically people should "stand on their own two feet" and work for what they have instead of relying on big brother for help. Yet you support foreign aid and alliances that would draw us into wars the moment another country could not "stand on its own two feet" or work for its own well being. You are the worst kind of hypocrite, one that doesn't realize how logically contradictory your own beliefs are. The truely sad part is that folks that think just like you make up the majority of the "conservative" movement. You are not principled and are a flip flopper through and through.

You are a joke plain and simple. The less folks like you that vote the better off this nation will be.

 

and anti-semetic. need I say more? (or at least not interested in supporting our only ally in the middle east)

 

So saying that Israel should support itself is anti-semetic?

You are racist for not supporting welfare. You hate everyone that is not white for that very reason. You racist bastard.

 

That's not anti-semetic at all. I don't care about the defence of Uganda does that make me a KKK member? Absolutely rediculous statement following an absolutely rediculous OP.

 

I would agree that was strong. But we should supports our allies.

So to recap. Ron Paul is:

Anti Reagan on foreign policy.
Pro Iranian nukes
Against the Pakistan raid of OBL
in unison with Reverend Wright that america's chickennnnns, have come home to roost.
Against protecting any of our allies from attacks even a genocidal nuclear attack on Israel (after supporting Iranian nukes)

Piece of work, this guy! And he'll be the new McCain media darling (until their done with him or find a better useful idiot).

 

RP is an isolationist, that's the platform for his foriegn policy. What does that have to do with the OP though, it was definately not McCain's policy during the election.

You said RP betrayed his party, but he's not really a republican he's run on an independant ballot more than once. RP is running as a republican currently because the electorial climate will not allow him to run seriously as an independant.

Your OP lacks substance, and you've played the 'anti-semetic' card way too early. Don't ally's go to war for eachother? Shouldn't Israel be in Iraq, Afganistan and Libya if you're so close? Oh that's right, most of those problems stem from the fact that you're allies with Israel.

RP's isolationist beliefs are because he does not see them as fiscally responsible. It's not responsible to spend billions on a war when your own people are burdening the debt, allies or not. RP says Iran can have the nuke because you let Israel develop the nuke, you let India develop the nuke, you let Pakistan develop the nuke. Are they allowed to have free reign over weapons of mass destruction simply because they are your allies?

 

Nice Edit. I even noticed you edited twice while I was responding.

He's not Pro-Iran Nukes, he's Anti-getting in other countries business.

Your Chickens have come to roost, if you can't recognize that I really don't think you have any business commenting on foreign policy.

Are you suggesting that you should engage in nuclear warfare if Iran becomes agressive against Israel?

 

I just want people to be clear you what Ron Paul believes. Most don't know he's anti-Reagan. Most don't know he thinks Iranian nukes would be a good thing considering how they're surrounded with nukes. What you don't believe he said that? Let me quote it.

“Just think of how many nuclear weapons surround Iran,” said Paul. “The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there. All these countries … Why wouldn’t it be natural if they might want a weapon? Internationally, they might be given more respect. Why should we write people off?”

Now you believe me? That's the moron you support. You have the right to do so. That would make you a moron also, but I'm for moron rights. I'm also for calling them out.

edit: and btw, I'll edit my posts how I like. don't be a post nazi.

 

Let me guess, you, like Bush, believe that the terrorist attacked us "because they hate us for our freedom"?

 

What's wrong with blaming the U.S.? I think we should blame ourselves before pointing fingers at everyone else. I'm not saying we're responsible for everything bad that happens (we most certainly aren't) but we should always look at ourselves first and see where we can improve, what we could have done better before we go blaming everyone else. If we do that we'll be a stronger nation for it, if we exhibit no self reflection we will become weaker.