Friday, November 30, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
4:08 PM
|
|
As a conservative evangelical who hates the size of our federal government, who wants our liberties restored, and wants a sensible foreign policy, Ron Paul is the candidate that best represents Christians in policy.
What makes him a crack pot to folk like you is your inability to think out of the neo-conservative box, a desire to "do right", spread democracy (and not necessarily synonymous with Christianity). Iraq's poor cripled military was no threat to us....half their soldiers didn't even wear shoes..Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11...his economy was in shambles....and oil-for-food was basically a UN bureaucracy created scandel....what do you think a dictator will do when faced with sanctions.....behave? No, he'll use the corrupt bureaucracies and framework set up to keep himself in power. So we end up starving the Iraqi people, and Hussein still smokes Cuban cigars, and is made a hero by our failures. All based on the false premise of WMDs, we have used military might to go to war against a vastly inferior "enemy" .... taking a sledge hammer to a problem the size of a tack. The Scandel is that it the costs of this war, and the governments printing of money to pay for it (ostensibly robbing from the wealth of those who saved)....spend now, your money will be gone tomorrow. Our foreign policy, like every other bureaucratic ungodly mess is the source of these problems, and not the solution.
Ron Paul offers alternatives that cost far less, and will make us safer in the long run at home.
Christians should know better. Shame on YOU!!
Go ahead, vote for your next warmonger and thief-in-chief. |
|
One more thing.....
Ron Paul is pretty genuine, humble, Christian guy. You should cut him some slack. |
|
He's running for President of The United States of America... what slack??
And, the point IS..... he may win 4Q fundraising, Still can't break 3% in polls...
Why?
|
|
Dr. Paul is the only candidate with the candor to expose America's abusive, deceitful monetary policy as the root of its foreign and domestic ills. A citizenry that works first for the IRS, secondly for its state and local taxing authorities and finally for the commericial bankers who own the Federal Reserve is little more than a serf. Nor does he exercise any legitimate leverage against perpetual warfare, welfare, or the theft of his labor and savings. Other than that we're free, however.
A Paul presidency represents a peaceful AND prosperous America; with any Democrat or any other Republican the voter is forced to choose one or the other. He will secure the border and the ports. He will work to end birthright citizenship for illegals' offspring. His voting record is uncompromisingly conservative (unless you define imperialism as conservatism). He does not participate in Congress' lavish retirement and healthcare programs; he has even introduced legislation to reduce congressional pay at the rate of inflation, since the dollar is debased under the watchful eyes (and sticky fingers) of our profligate legislature. As a citizen who treasures individual freedom and responsibility, the pursuit of property, strong national defense (not offense) and small government, I could pray for no better advocate than Ron Paul.
He voted to invade Afghanistan, as the Taliban was providing material aid and comfort to those who attacked us and their sympathizers. He supports letters of marque. But his principled commitment to the constitution prevented him from endorsing the "liberation" of Iraq. Five years later, he seems wise for abstaining from the Saddam-has-WMD hysteria.
Perhaps Mr. McCullough would entreat us to the relative merits of our present Keynesian controlled economic system over the Austrian free market system that Dr. Paul espouses? |
|
The slack is for the crackpot bit.
Why?
His isn't the media elite's selection....he is discounted by the Hannity's...the Limbaughs....the FoxNN, CNN, MSNBC....
He isn't taken seriously....
Ever wonder why those running for president always seem to be CFR Team A vs CFR Team B?
Oh, and CFR stands for Council of Foreign Relations. And no, I am not a conspiracist....its just happens I do believe these think tanks do have influence on who the media will cover. Since Ron Paul can't be bribed, and he is a man of integrity, who won't give our country to the elites, he gets no coverage.
Except....the grass roots show their support for him, no? |
|
That's one question... WHY?
And, apparently, he's not taken seriously by approximately 97% (+/-) of the population. WHY?
Perhaps because approximately 97% of the population doesn't see things the way paul and his supporters see them... such as the WOT!
And, if you and paul don't take the WOT and the radical Islamic threat, you probably should have watched Glenn Beck last night. It might have been educational and enlightening.
|
|
Are you dense or can you not read. I answered why. He isn't CFR Team A or CFR Team B.
But I am sure your CFR Team member will fulfill your wildest disasters...propagate the size of government, institute bilingual feel good education.
Hablas espanol?
|
|
Why is Paul doing so well in the fund raising, not being sponsored by CFR Team A or CFR Team B?
Why? |
|
One more favor you can do for me and answer this.
Do you believe in blowback? |
|
and Rush and Hannity, etc., etc., etc., but believe it or not, most of us actually DO think for ourselves.
We don't need Rush and Hannity to do our thinking for us... we figure things out on our own... all by oursleves.
And, the bottom line is that we don't agree with paul's stand on a lot of issues; in fact, most especially his inept view on foreign policy (although I do agree with some of his domestic points.)
In fact, there isn't ONE... NOT ONE... expert on terrorism who agrees with paul. That's very distrubing.
|
|
name calling, huh?
"Are you dense or can you not read."
That doesn't answer the big difference between campaign funds and polls.
|
|
agree with him!!!
Blowback? |
|
You didn't answer my questions.
Why has the presidents the last >20 years been CFR Team A vs CFR Team B?
What is blowback? You don't know? Pretty naive, eh? |
|
The 9-11 Commission based its assessments on testimony from experts on terrorism and the Middle East. Asked about the motivations of the terrorists, FBI Special Agent James Fitzgerald told the commission: "I believe they feel a sense of outrage against the United States. They identify with the Palestinian problem, they identify with people who oppose repressive regimes, and I believe they tend to focus their anger on the United States."
Fitzgerald's was not a lonely voice in the intelligence community.
Michael Scheuer, the former Central Intelligence Agency specialist on bin Laden and al-Qaeda, has objected to simplistic suggestions by President Bush and others that terrorists are motivated by an ill-defined irrational hatred of the United States. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people," Scheuer said in a CNN interview. "We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people."
|
|
"In fact, there isn't ONE... NOT ONE... expert on terrorism who agrees with paul. That's very distrubing"
No, there are many:
former CIA bin Laden Task Force chief Michael Scheuer, and the premier expert on suicide terrorism, Dr. Robert Pape, also agree with Ron Paul. |
|
May win 4Q fundraising, Still can't break 3% in polls... which is what this is about.....
But, you might want to find out why paul has NOT made time to go on Glenn Beck,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNEgkAshNnI
who has offered paul a full hour each on TV and radio.
Oh, perhaps because Beck will thump paul on foreign policy?
|
|
Are you in the picture?
http://www.ronpaulonline.com/content/view/114/162/ |
|
The likes of Steve Emerson and Daniel Pipes totally disagree with paul... and that list goes on and on and on.
But, my point is, it's obvious that 97% (+/-) people don't agree with paul, and not because of the media and Rush and Hannity, etc., as you would like to believe.
It's because they just don't agree with him and do not want to see him as pres.
It's basically that simple!!!
|
|
It lists some of the other candidates on CFR...pretty well covers things:
FRED THOMPSON,CFR
HILLARY CLINTON, CFR
AL GORE, Trilateral Commission
JOHN MCCAIN, CFR
BARRACK OBAMA, CFR
MIT ROMNEY, CFR
in the past:
GEORGE W. BUSH, Trilateral Commission
BILL CLINTON, CFR and Trilateral Commission
GEORGE H.W. BUSH Sr., Council on Foreign Relations director from 1977-1979, and a member of the Trilateral Commission
Get the picture?
|
|
Are you learning to think yet?
What is blowback Senorita? |
|
Daniel Pipes just posted an article on townhall showing being in Iraq is el' stupido.
Here it is.
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5107
His conclusion:
A change of course is needed, and quickly. The Bush administration needs to hand back responsibility for Iraq's ills, including and especially the Mosul Dam. More broadly, it should abandon the deeply flawed and upside-down approach of "war as social work," whereby U.S. military efforts are judged primarily by the benefits they bring to the defeated enemy, rather than to Americans.
Sorry....Anne, wrong again!
|
|
have to go and enjoy what little freedom I have, and spend lots of money since Bush is inflating it...it will lose value.....
But..
"But, my point is, it's obvious that 97% (+/-) people don't agree with paul, and not because of the media and Rush and Hannity, etc., as you would like to believe."
Geez...this is totally wrong. You don't know what people believe or don't believe.
People don't even know who Ron Paul is bacause he isn't CFR Team A or CFR Team B.
His fund raising reflects massive grass roots support. Generally most of the public can't even say who Dick Cheney or Al Gore is...let alone an obscure figure such as Ron Paul. Rush and Hannity don't support him....and you who doesn't even know what blowback is.....shows that no, you can't think for yourself, you let Sean Hannity do the thinking for you.
You don't even know what Daniel Pipes writes!
|
|
97% (+/-) don't agree with paul, regardless of how much money he claim to have...
That's the question at hand.
|
|
Daniel Pipes .....
"As coalition policy reaches a crisis, may I resurrect an idea I have been flogging since April 2003? It offers a way out of the current debate over staying the course (as President George W. Bush has long advocated) or withdrawing troops on a short timetable (as his critics demand).
"My solution splits the difference, "Stay the course – but change the course." I suggest pulling coalition forces out of the inhabited areas of Iraq and redeploying them to the desert.
"This way, the troops remain indefinitely in Iraq, but remote from the urban carnage. It permits the American-led troops to carry out essential tasks (protecting borders, keeping the oil and gas flowing, ensuring that no Saddam-like monster takes power) while ending their non-essential work (maintaining street-level order, guarding their own barracks)."
|
|
|
are still tied in the polls? Somebody owes ME a few million. |
|
the other day that had you way ahead...
And yes, somebody DOES owe you a few million! :-)
|
|
Anne,
I bet we'll find out that a lot of Ron Paul's money is coming from wealthy dictators in the Middle East.
After all, they love Ron Paul's contempt for Israel as well as his contempt for...spreading democracy in the Middle East.
Besides, Ron Paul must really be reaching that constituency because I hear that Ron Paul has really increased the frequency of his radio ads on Al-Jazeera ! |
|
before. Huh?
It's possible, I guess, but do you really think it's probable???
|
|
seem to have left since your suggestion...
Hummmmm?
|
|
|
who commented on my blog, Jim Rogers, manager of the Quantum Fund (and George Soros' investment partner) is one of the wealthy contributors to Ron Paul. Strange bedfellows if true and begs the question: Is MoveOn.Org re-directing some of their contributions to Ron Paul as a nuisance candidate? I would bet the farm that Paul will run independent. |
|
|
|
I was just being tongue-in-cheek about Arab dictators sending Paul money because Ron Paul and his supporters have so much contempt for Israel.
Naturally, that's why David Duke and all the neo-Nazis are gravitating toward Paul.
American Free Press readers haven't found a candidate they like this much since...Hitler !
|
|
You are grasping at Straws....and even Pipes change by "splitting the difference" is inconsistent with his earlier position....another flip flopper.
"Since April 2003, I have argued that this shouldering of responsibility for Iraq's domestic life has harmed both Americans and Iraqis. It yokes Americans with unwanted and unnecessary loss of life, financial obligations, and political burdens. For Iraqis, as the dam example suggests, it encourages an irresponsibility with potentially ruinous consequences."
Same article as posted above...but you didn't read it, did you.
how about....
"an American military occupation of Iraq lasting for more than some months would probably lead to one of the great disasters in American foreign policy....the Iraqi populace can be counted on to resent a predominantly American occupying force."
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/64
Pipes understood and understands what "blowback" is, and you don't. His recent article proposing moving American troops out into the desert is highly debatable tactic; it is splitting the difference in redeploying the US out of Iraq....and US troops would be used for what...according to Pipes? To protect Iraqi Oil! How transparent is that? We would still be on Muslim lands...the kinds of Muslim lands that lead to Khobar Towers, USS Cole..., and would not be securing anything...(remember we needed "the surge"?). But none of this self evident you can't think, anyway. I think you are truly an anti-Paul Bot....all you do is wait around to spend hours posting your idiocy on every message board relevant to Ron Paul. Get a life. I don't spend hours of my time bashing your CFR Team A candidate.
|
|
You keep ignoring my question. Why does Ron Paul raise so much money for being so low in the polls?
A realistic answer please. Not the calumnous BS posted by Phil, and OHM. |
|
bots like Anne.
I'll be amused by the response.
How would you feel if our government requested the battleship al-khobar to be parked at one of our ports? Or at the height of the cold war, the air craft carrier Lenin parked in one of our ports?
Get the picture? We are deployed in over 60 countries world wide. Our military makes "mistakes" which costs innocent lives....as an example...the jet in Italy in the 90's that killed italians when it whipped through a ski lift cable? What if you son or daughter was on that ski lift?
don't give me some screw ball answer like "we were invited". I'll only respond that if you were invited to jump off a bridge, would you do it!?!
|
|
|
please get the numbers right. according to daily presidential tracking at rasmussen, paul has been between 5-6% in the past two weeks. |
|
There are 2 Rep candidates who are worse than Bill Clinton.
Huckabee got a D in 2004 from the CATO Institute on taxes. He got an F in 2006. Huck is a big government tax and spend liberal. He is actually worse than Bill Clinton. Clinton's worst grade from CATO was a D.
Rudy When Clinton was messing with Monica we (at the least) claimed he was reckless, had bad judgment and had impulse control problems. What Rudy did in NY in the process of divorcing his 2nd wife, committing adultery at tax payer expense, and marrying his 3rd wife is actually worse than what Clinton did with Monica. |
|
"And, the point IS..... he may win 4Q fundraising, Still can't break 3% in polls...
Why?" - Anne
Yet you illogically jump to the conclusion that 3% of the Republicans are paying for Paul's fundraising success. But that doesn't make any sense, because if you look at Paul's FEC report, he has less doners that have tapped out their contribution limits than Giuliani or Romney. You ask a very interesting question.
Either the polls are mistaken about his support or his fundraising is mistaken about his support. Do you have any evidence that it is the fundraising that is misleading? besides your polls? To assume that Paul's fundraising is misleading because the polls don't support it, is to assume that the polls are not misleading, which is circular reasoning - aka begging the question. If you are assuming that the polls are correct because they are presented by the MSM, then that is a plea to authority. Do you have evidence that the number of doners to Paul's campaign is unusually small, or their donations unusually large? I don't expect you to respond [but I hope you do], because if you understand my argument, you know you are just about to get whipped. |
|
Both raving lunatics as usual.
You guys planning to get married yet?
Have your fun. You are simply barking at the moon, now. |
|
This whole thread, as with every other ronpaul column, if anyone DARE question paul's position or disagree, the paulpots go CA-RAZY!
No discussion, no debate! They just go off!
All I'm saying, and I've been saying it for some time, there is a HUGE DISCONNECT between his "fundraising" and his "poll numbers."
And the bottom line is, a ga-zillion DOLLARS in the bank does not elect a president. VOTES elect a president!
|
|
|
You're doing a great job campaigning for Paul by posing as the opposition. Keep up the good work. |
|
many, many, many people call the paulists "crackpots?"
And, you wonder why so many people think ronpaul is a "crackpot" and won't consider voting for him BECAUASE of the "crackpot paulists?"
And, what did I say above? "... if anyone DARE question paul's position or disagree, the paulpots go CA-RAZY!
"No discussion, no debate! They just go off!"
Then the best you come up with an inane, vapid, useless comment!
And you wonder why ronpaul doesn't have any poll numbers?
No question there! Keep up the good work!
|
|
you're funny. I've been reading your comments here and have been laughing to the point that it hurts.
"heresyarch: You can blame the media
and Rush and Hannity, etc., etc., etc., but believe it or not, most of us actually DO think for ourselves.
We don't need Rush and Hannity to do our thinking for us... we figure things out on our own... all by oursleves."
Meggadittos, Anne! Sheer comedy!
You're not fooling me. You love Dr. Paul. No one could post as much nonsense without secretly supporting him. :D
Shoot, I wouldn't be surprised if OHM is a Paul supporter as well mascarading as a brain dead one note johnny neocon.
|
|
This is just killing you, isn't it???
You and your paulists just CANNOT bring yourselves to face the fact...
"... HUGE DISCONNECT between his "fundraising" and his "poll numbers.... ga-zillion DOLLARS in the bank does not elect a president. VOTES elect a president!"
I'm beginning to wonder if Pasadena Phil might not be right..... "Jim Rogers, manager of the Quantum Fund (and George Soros' investment partner) is one of the wealthy contributors to Ron Paul. ..... Is MoveOn.Org re-directing some of their contributions to Ron Paul as a nuisance candidate?"
What a hoot! And to think ronpaul would turn out to be the biggest....... ever!
|
|
Guess what? Peter Schiff is also supporting Paul.
Oh, I forgot to tell you that "you're a great American" for all that you are dong for Paul.
Town Hall is a great recruitment tool for the Paul campaign. When I run across a person who is undecided I have that person read some of the negative comments about Paul posted here. That usually does the trick in getting another vote for Paul.
Y'all are doing some pretty work, so keep up those nasty and ignorant comments! |
|
Practically the only time you post is to bash Paul. Why are you so passionate him when he has no chance? It seems to be about the only thing that gets you going.
I mean, really, who cares about Paul? He's not really in the race. Even if he goes 3rd party, he will take as many votes away from dems as repubs.
Just wondering why you get so worked up. |
|
"No discussion, no debate! They just go off!"
This is bogus.
I have answered *thoroughly* EVERY one of your objections. You have not answered MANY if not ALL of mine. Shall I review.
1) What is Blowback
2) You've never read Pipes because you don't know what he stands for. At least I read him aned mostly agree with what he says, and find him more congruent with Paul than Bush or You or Hannity is. Yet you bring Pipes in as an anti Paulist.
3) You can't account for the inconsistency between your claim of 3% support and the fact that Ron Paul has raised more money in one quarter than the CFR Team A members.
4) I have given quotes and multiple terrorist expert names who agree with Ron Paul.
5) How would you feel if the battleship al-Khobar was ported off NY City or some city.
6) You cannot account for the hours you spend dealing with a candidate you don't support but obviously feel threatened by.
You don't answer one of these. Therefore I am to conclude: "No discussion, no debate! You just go off!"
You are nuts.
|
|
You should at least read Pipes' and Scheuer's books before commenting on a complicated subject like terrorism and American foreign policy.
Anne just doesn't get that these phrases aren't solved by Limbaugh's wit. I don't know why she bothers bringing up Hannity, the man is practically illiterate. |
|
Just by the huge amount of money mad he will affect the Conservative party.
PEOPLE WANT LIBERTY. the liberty described in the US Constitution not by liberal Presidnets or Congress.
P.S. I know RP is HUGE on college campuses I go to about 2 a week. |
|
"All I'm saying, and I've been saying it for some time, there is a HUGE DISCONNECT between his "fundraising" and his "poll numbers."
And the bottom line is, a ga-zillion DOLLARS in the bank does not elect a president. VOTES elect a president!"
I agree that there is a 'HUGE DISCONNECT' between his '"fundraising"' and his '"poll numbers"'. And I agree that, 'VOTES elect a president!"' I don't agree that polls are more indicative of votes than fundraising. Even the most methodologically robust poll cannot be more accurate than its standard deviation, which is a function of sampling.
For example, when you see Paul has polled at 8% with a 4.56% error, what that means is that there is a 95% chance that Paul's support falls between 3.44% and 12.56%. Also, you fail to understand the difference between polling and mobilization or activation strength. Mobilization is the act of spreading the message. Activation is the act of targeting specific non-random populations to take action. Both of these actions are important to a political outcome, and both are expensive. The more the populations of these two actions differ the more expensive the processes become. Paul, while lagging in the fundraising, has managed to almost perfectly merge these two acts into one. His campaign's mobilization efforts are practically identical to its activation efforts. This means that it is cheaper to him to run his campaign. This is thepolitical theory behind grassroots [crabgrass] support.
I don't really care if you understand this. I just want people to know that if you are interested in Paul, he has as good a chance as anyone else in this campaign for the Republican nomination. |
|
Good post, though it is probably way above Anne's head.
It is interesting to note that instead of this campaign being directed by the top down it is really from the bottom up. Paul does have a groundswell of firm support that will serve him well. This is one of the most fascinating campaigns I have observed. |
|
Paul keeps getting compared to Dean. First of all, in 2004, the Democrats were trying to defeat an incumbant war president. That is not the time to elect a maverick. Establishment will win every time under those circumstances. This is why, Clinton, while not really a Democrat favorite is doing so well. She is establishment enough to win. The Republicans will lose with an Establishment candidate, because that is exactly what the Democrats are voting against. So not only are the circumstances of this race different than in 2004, they are wildly different.
Paul's support is not like Dean's support at all. It is like Dean on steriods. It is like 5 Howard Deans converging on identical platforms. The Democrats are out for blood. They are tired of losing, and they hate Bush and everything therein associated. The only way to keep limited government values alive in '08 is to provide an irresistable siren to the Democrat base of support. That siren is Paul. He will lure them in with his populist message, maverick status, and anti-Republican foreign policy. Democrats I know are already panicking about Paul. They see their base lured to the 'dark side' and try to fiht it, but they can't seem to stop the bleeding. Paul is not just a thorn in the Republican party, he is the only Republican that is a thorn in the Democrat party as well. Paul is the most Republican candidate that stands a chance.
Vote Republican. Vote Ron Paul. |
|
Ryan01 wrote;
--------------
"Town Hall is a great recruitment tool for the Paul campaign. When I run across a person who is undecided I have that person read some of the negative comments about Paul posted here. That usually does the trick in getting another vote for Paul."
--------------
Ryan, does that mean you want us to say MORE negative things about Ron Paul ?!
|
|
|
What a cheap and pathetic blog post from Kevin McCullough. |
|
Many on the far right claim the left are "invested in defeat" regarding Iraq. Alternately, it can be said that the far right are "invested in victory." Though that sounds good, what exactly is victory? If victory in the "war on drugs" is a drug free society, which is impossible, then victory in "the war on terror" is a peaceful world, which is also impossible (human nature and all that). That said, I believe the vast majority of right-wing radio personalities are "invested in victory." Though unattainable, these folks cannot reverse themselves lest they risk losing ratings and therefore money (Hannity has to pay for his new 165 foot yacht somehow). These people are selling the lives of our youth and wasting national treasure for their own personal gain. This is just as despicable as their claim that the left are sabataging the war effort for political gain. Anyway, just saying is all. |
|
http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=182537
Ron Paul now GOP frontrunner according to fund raising Maple Brown
Published 11/30/2007 - 11:01 p.m. EST
Republican Presidential candidate, Ron Paul, is now the frontrunner in the GOP race according to this months fund raising numbers. Paul rose over 10.3 million in the fourth quarter with a month left to go in the quarter. That number is double of what Paul raised in the third quarter.
By contrast, rival Fred Thompson raised $9,750,821 in the third quarter. Mitt Romney raised $9,896,719 in the third quarter, and Rudy Giuliani raised $10,258,019 in the third quarter.
Paul, unlike his opponents, with the exception of Fred Thompson who entered the race in the third quarter, raised more money in the third quarter than he did in the second.
December is setting up to be Ron Paul’s strongest month yet. Grassroots organizers have picked December 16th to commemorate the Boston Tea Party with a Ron Paul Tea party. The online fundraising effort has 22,500 people already registered for a $100 donation for the event. There were approximately 16,000 pledges for the November 5th money bomb that yielded a record 4.2 million dollar day.
Trevor Lyman, the volunteer fundraiser has also managed to raise the funds needed to launch a Ron Paul Blimp. The airship, scheduled to launch on December 10th will be flying over Boston during the Tea Party.
With average donations of $100, Paul has the potential to benefit from monthly online fund raising events now through November of 2008.
Until the first caucus or primary the only tangible method of measuring who is leading the GOP field is fund raising. Since Paul is receiving donations averaging $100 apiece the figures are even more impressive. |
|
|
Yep, the name of his blog sums him up nicely. A real muscleheaded, GOP shill. I bet he thinks he clever with his double entendre using Paul's name. The Pol Pot link is typical of a moronic neocon. |
|
|