Ron Paul Has Just Guaranteed He Will Not Be Elected !

[billt]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/ron-paul-ordered-bin-laden-raid/

Why does this guy keep doing $h!t like this?   Bill T.

[Timothy]

I'll never understand this guy.  I don't entirely disagree with his libertarian philosophy but on this subject he's just wrong!

[fightingquaker13]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/ron-paul-ordered-bin-laden-raid/

Why does this guy keep doing $h!t like this?   Bill T.

Because he is bat sh!t crazy and a fanatic? Look, don't get me wrong, I've met the man on more than few occasions in Tx.. He showed up at my church to do some outreach programs in his district, which is close to Austin. He's a great guy, very smart and affable. I agree with most of his platform. But he has drunk so much Ayn Rand Kool-aid that he doesn't understand the real world. He thinks compromising principles is selling out, not just adjusting to unpleasant realities. Returning to the gold standard? Withdrawing ALL US troops from overseas? The list goes on. He doesn't get that what's nice in theory doesn't work in practice. That's good in a Congressman. Its a voice of conscience. But its a damn disaster in a President who actually has to deal with real life consequences.
The guy never had a chance to be elected anyway. Now, this boneheaded remark about respecting another nation's soveriegnty over our national interest will keep him from even elevating the debate like he did last time. Its too bad. We need more guys like him out there in the public square, we just shouldn't make them POTUS.
FQ13 who would have shot Bin Laden in the Pope's bedroom if that's what it took.

[billt]

I agree with both of you. I'm so sick and tired of this total a$$hat. I've tried like hell to understand his positions, and give him every benefit of the doubt. But I swear to God this guy would be a total train wreck if he ever did get elected, which he won't. And they have the audacity to talk about Trump and his remarks. Give me a break!   Bill T.

[Pathfinder]

And yet Ronnie boy is constantly held up as the poster boy for libertarianism. One of the key libertarian - or is it Libertarian? - positions is to sever all foreign relations, aid, bases, and everything else that smacks of us being involved with "them".

Sad, isn't it? Paul and Romney are currently the 2 GOP leaders, and between this and Mitt's defense of his pre-bho-care bho-care program in MA, we're still stuck with the both of them.    WTH? ? ? ?

[Sponsor]

[MinotBob]

That's what I thought when I read this.

[fightingquaker13]

And yet Ronnie boy is constantly held up as the poster boy for libertarianism. One of the key libertarian - or is it Libertarian? - positions is to sever all foreign relations, aid, bases, and everything else that smacks of us being involved with "them".

Sad, isn't it? Paul and Romney are currently the 2 GOP leaders, and between this and Mitt's defense of his pre-bho-care bho-care program in MA, we're still stuck with the both of them.    WTH? ? ? ?

Libertian (capital L) is the party, libertarian (small l) is the philosophy. (They are two different animals as the party is sadly a joke. The philosophy of libertarianism is what founded the country. ).Thing is, Paul does represent one wing of libertarianism which is Randian Objectivism (note the name of his son). Its a bigger movement than that. Even here he is somewhat contradictory, as he is anti-choice which is rare, but not unheard of, in libertarian circles. The same can be said of his FP. A lot of us are pragmatists in this area and realize that isolationism doesn't work. We just look at Vietnam, Panama, Beirut, Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq and Libya and wonder what was worth a single American life or tax dollar. We support NATO, but don't want to foot the whole bill. Its a philosophy with different camps, most of us falling into a more traditional classical liberal (again, small l) position. But Paul is on the Taliban wing of the movement.
FQ13

[fullautovalmet76]

Because he is bat sh!t crazy and a fanatic?.....But he has drunk so much Ayn Rand Kool-aid that he doesn't understand the real world. ......Returning to the gold standard? Withdrawing ALL US troops from overseas?............

All right. I have to step in here and stop you. I understand his ill-timed but correct point; so let's put it this way: Would you like it if the Mexican government flew their special forces into our country, raided, and killed a group of people they had a problem with? Ever hear of national sovereignty? Or is your position kind of like its OK for me to piss in your pool but don't you piss in mine? Quaker, we will reap what we sow; so don't bitch when foreign troops land on our soil to administer their president's foreign policy.

And for the gold standard, it worked for 180 years. What cost $1.00 in 1913 now will cost you $22.57 in 2011. So tell me how has the Federal Reserve and Nixon's policy worked out for us?

Withdrawing troops from overseas? What's wrong with that? We didn't have anywhere near the problems we have today until we started doing England's bidding in the late 19th century and it has progressed from there. I know. I know. You're going to tell me about South Korea and the middle east oil. But I will ask you why do you support American tax payers propping up the social welfare states of France, Germany, Italy, and Spain with our military in that region? You do realize their military spending is artificially low due to our presence, right?

[fightingquaker13]

All right. I have to step in here and stop you. I understand his ill-timed but correct point; so let's put it this way: Would you like it if the Mexican government flew their special forces into our country, raided, and killed a group of people they had a problem with? Ever hear of national sovereignty? Or is your position kind of like its OK for me to piss in your pool but don't you piss in mine? Quaker, we will reap what we sow; so don't bitch when foreign troops land on our soil to administer their president's foreign policy.

I'm using bold to distinguish my post from yours, not to shout.  As to the above, pretty much yes. FP boils down to power. If (and I suspect its already hapened with a wink and a nod over the last decade) Mexican operatives hit one of their cartel leaders in the US, that's the way it works. We hit a guy in Italy, they bitched, but lived with it. IR is governed by rules, but those are made by those who have power.To quote "The Book of Common Prayer": As it was in the begining, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.    


Withdrawing troops from overseas? What's wrong with that? We didn't have anywhere near the problems we have today until we started doing England's bidding in the late 19th century and it has progressed from there. I know. I know. You're going to tell me about South Korea and the middle east oil. But I will ask you why do you support American tax payers propping up the social welfare states of France, Germany, Italy, and Spain with our military in that region? You do realize their military spending is artificially low due to our presence, right?
I thought I addressed the issue of not carrying our NATO allies, or Japan. As for the rest of it, it's a dangerous world and we live in it. We can't trust our allies to support us unless its in their interests. The lame coalition forces and ROEs in Iraq and Afghanistan (the UK mostly excepted) speak volumes to that. We can't withdraw from all of our overseas bases. That said, we can sure scale down. Paul though doesn't do things by half. He also doesn't realize that too much of a good thing can in and of it self be a bad thing, particularly when the cost of screwing up is measured in body bags. Just my .02.

FQ13

[r_w]

There is NO way he would make it through the primaries.  He doesn't play with the "establishment"