Another example of why Ron Paul is a phony conservative

[teapartysamurai]

I make no secret of the fact that I LOATHE Ron Paul.

There isn't a dime's worth of difference between Ron Paul and the far left when it comes to the Middle East and here is another example:

Video: Ron Paul denounces Israel’s flotilla raid, of course

Hot Air Video: Ron Paul denounces Israel’s flotilla raid, of course

Go ahead and watch it if you have the stomach, it's all there, but it's no surprise.

I've had Ron Paul's number since he got busted in 2007/8 for newsletters he did in the 80s which were flagrantly anti-semite (among other things). Ron Paul's excuses that he didn't know what was in his own newsletter rang about as hollow as Barack Obama sitting in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years and never knew Wright was a hate-filled bigot.

My favorite video of Ron Paul is in the debates Paul says we need to "understand" why the terrorists attacked us on 9/11 aka we need to stop supporting Israel (aka the same position the left had about 9/11). Rudy Guilliani just DESTROYS Paul in his response.

There is no secret why Ron Paul had no chance of becoming president. I don't care how domestically fiscal he pretends to be (and pretend is the word) his views on our foreign policy is the same apologist/appesement view of the left.

**And as for Ron Paul's supposed fiscal bonafides, he's a phony on that, too. He claims he has never voted for an earmark. Sure! But that doesn't mean he's never put an ear mark in a bill. He puts them in bills he knows that will pass, but then votes NO on those bills, so he can claim he has never voted for an ear mark.

But ask Ron Paul has he ever put pork (aka an earmark) in a bill and you are going to get the same mealy mouth equivocation, he makes about 9/11.

That's why Ron Paul never had a chance to be president. Too many people saw through him.

I hope Rand Paul is different. (so far he seems to be)

 

[Ravi]

Tea party implosion!

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't see how differing on matters of foreign affairs that don't involve us directly makes someone phony.

I disagree with Ron Paul on a number of issues. And I am not always impressed with his character. However, he is right on a number of important issues. And those tend to be the ones that are conservative.

We don't have to agree with everyone on anything in order to do good in this world. I will gladly work with Ron Paul to help our nation follow the Constitution. Regardless of what your thoughts may be.

 

[Dixie]

Say what you will about Ron Paul, but one thing he can't be legitimately faulted for is inconsistency. Even a cursory review of his record in Congress will reveal his unfailing insistence in viewing everything in the context of the Constitution; there's really nothing liberal or conservative about that. If anything, Paul's positions are most frequently aligned with libertarian thought and he did once run for president on the Libertarian ticket.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Ron Paul will never become President mostly because he's insane.

But also because of AIPAC.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ron Paul is not a conservative. He is a narco-libertarian. While there are some points of agreement between the two camps, there is a wide area of disagreement. This is one example.
Paul will never get traction in the GOP precisely because his foreign policy views resemble Jane Fonda more than Ronald Reagan.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Ron Paul is not a conservative. He is a narco-libertarian. While there are some points of agreement between the two camps, there is a wide area of disagreement. This is one example.
Paul will never get traction in the GOP precisely because his foreign policy views resemble Jane Fonda more than Ronald Reagan.

But who gets to decide what's "conservative" and what's not? You?

 

[The Rabbi]

Ron Paul is not a conservative. He is a narco-libertarian. While there are some points of agreement between the two camps, there is a wide area of disagreement. This is one example.
Paul will never get traction in the GOP precisely because his foreign policy views resemble Jane Fonda more than Ronald Reagan.

But who gets to decide what's "conservative" and what's not? You?

Yes, me.
You have a better authority?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Ron Paul is not a conservative. He is a narco-libertarian. While there are some points of agreement between the two camps, there is a wide area of disagreement. This is one example.
Paul will never get traction in the GOP precisely because his foreign policy views resemble Jane Fonda more than Ronald Reagan.

But who gets to decide what's "conservative" and what's not? You?

Yes, me.
You have a better authority?

The Rabbi, the voice of all Conservatives.

That explains why we're in the situation we're in, I guess.

 

[The Rabbi]

But who gets to decide what's "conservative" and what's not? You?

Yes, me.
You have a better authority?

The Rabbi, the voice of all Conservatives.

That explains why we're in the situation we're in, I guess.

Did I say I was the voice of all Conservatives? No, you said that.
Do you have a better authority for what is conservative and what is not? If so, state it. If not, then STFU.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I make no secret of the fact that I LOATHE Ron Paul.

There isn't a dime's worth of difference between Ron Paul and the far left when it comes to the Middle East and here is another example:

Video: Ron Paul denounces Israel’s flotilla raid, of course

Hot Air Video: Ron Paul denounces Israel’s flotilla raid, of course

Go ahead and watch it if you have the stomach, it's all there, but it's no surprise.

I've had Ron Paul's number since he got busted in 2007/8 for newsletters he did in the 80s which were flagrantly anti-semite (among other things). Ron Paul's excuses that he didn't know what was in his own newsletter rang about as hollow as Barack Obama sitting in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years and never knew Wright was a hate-filled bigot.

My favorite video of Ron Paul is in the debates Paul says we need to "understand" why the terrorists attacked us on 9/11 aka we need to stop supporting Israel (aka the same position the left had about 9/11). Rudy Guilliani just DESTROYS Paul in his response.

There is no secret why Ron Paul had no chance of becoming president. I don't care how domestically fiscal he pretends to be (and pretend is the word) his views on our foreign policy is the same apologist/appesement view of the left.

**And as for Ron Paul's supposed fiscal bonafides, he's a phony on that, too. He claims he has never voted for an earmark. Sure! But that doesn't mean he's never put an ear mark in a bill. He puts them in bills he knows that will pass, but then votes NO on those bills, so he can claim he has never voted for an ear mark.

But ask Ron Paul has he ever put pork (aka an earmark) in a bill and you are going to get the same mealy mouth equivocation, he makes about 9/11.

That's why Ron Paul never had a chance to be president. Too many people saw through him.

I hope Rand Paul is different. (so far he seems to be)

And yet, without Ron Paul you couldn't be the "Tea Party" Samurai.

And if you think Giuliani displaying his ignorance of blowback or the 9/11 Commission Report was "destroying" Ron Paul then I'm afraid the definition of "destroyed" must have changed somewhere along the way.

 

[The Rabbi]

Did Ron Paul start the Tea Party movement? Maybe he invented the Internet too?

 

[Zander]

He's a Libertarian, not a conservative. There is a difference ya know.....

 

[Modbert]

Ron Paul would be considered by many to be the Godfather of the Tea Party Movement. The fact they're beginning to eat their leader on this one is hilarious and just odd at the same time.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

He's a Libertarian, not a conservative. There is a difference ya know.....

How do you define the difference?

 

[Zander]

He's a Libertarian, not a conservative. There is a difference ya know.....

How do you define the difference?

Look it up dummy!!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

He's a Libertarian, not a conservative. There is a difference ya know.....

How do you define the difference?

Look it up dummy!!

Don't be an asshole. I asked you because they're relative words. Everyone defines them differently. I wanted to know how you define them.

 

[Ravi]

How do you define the difference?

Look it up dummy!!

Don't be an asshole. I asked you because they're relative words. Everyone defines them differently. I wanted to know how you define them.

He just did...his brand of Libertarian is just an arrogant "conservative."

 

[Zander]

How do you define the difference?

Look it up dummy!!

Don't be an asshole. I asked you because they're relative words. Everyone defines them differently. I wanted to know how you define them.

Ok, I apologize - I thought you were being a smart ass. It is a lengthy subject and quite honestly, I don't have the time to get into it right now - but here is the short version -

Basically Libertarians agree with Conservatives / Republicans on economics and free markets (although the big spending administrations in recent history show that only one group actually walks the walk and it ain't the Republicans) and they disagree on social policy and many aspects of foreign policy.

PS - I am a small "L" libertarian.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Look it up dummy!!

Don't be an asshole. I asked you because they're relative words. Everyone defines them differently. I wanted to know how you define them.

Ok, I apologize - I thought you were being a smart ass. It is a lengthy subject and quite honestly, I don't have the time to get into it right now - but here is the short version -

Basically Libertarians agree with Conservatives / Republicans on economics and free markets (although the big spending administrations in recent history show that only one group actually walks the walk and it ain't the Republicans) and they disagree on social policy and many aspects of foreign policy.

PS - I am a small "L" libertarian.

I know the difference between Republicans and libertarians, and Libertarians. What I was asking was the difference between "Conservatives" and "Libertarians" in your opinion. Generally, I hear most libertarians saying that they're the only "true" "conservatives", and then I hear people who just refer to themselves as "Conservative" - and those people's politics vary from being small-government Constitutionalists to Christian Fundamentalist nanny-staters.

So that's why I asked.

No offense taken, by the way. Most posts (including most of mine, probably) on this board are smart ass posts.