PDA

View Full Version : Neocons welcome?




Lipo
12-22-2007, 12:10 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

Kojack
12-22-2007, 12:18 PM
Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum?

Ron Paul? I don't think he spends too much time hanging out here.

It's great that you support the Constitution but I don't see what you would get out of hanging out here. It's unlikely that anyone will throw you out, but this is not a very receptive audience for those views.

If you're asking the forum in general, I say, do what you like, no hostile behavior.

Maverick
12-22-2007, 12:21 PM
Yeah, pretty much what Kojack said. Say what you like, but don't expect us to join in a Bush love-fest with you or something.

steph3n
12-22-2007, 12:34 PM
Lipo,

You are welcome here, but let me tell you you are dead wrong on "open association" with "anti-semitism and racism"

why? Because he is NOT. You can go to any rally he attends and get a picture with him no questions asked, he will even sign a shirt, bullhorn, book, money, or whatever no questions asked. You could when he was in congress(i mean before campaigning basically) and in his office go visit him more easily than most any other congressman. Talking to him does NOT mean an open association.

the other points can be studied and looked into and you can make your own choice on them, but most everyone supports Paul on his steadfast positions.

Ozwest
12-22-2007, 12:43 PM
If you are diametrically opposed to Ron Pauls positions on the Middle East, and refer to him as being anti-semetic and racist, you could not possibly call yourself a supporter.

iptf2
12-22-2007, 12:46 PM
Lipo Why Are You Here? Are You A Spy For The Bush Worshipers/ I, For One Resent You Being Here I Changed My Party To Vote For Ron Paul And I Resent You Being Here. All You Want To Do Is Bash. Take Your Ass Somewhere Else I Am Only Speaking For Myself.

undergroundrr
12-22-2007, 12:52 PM
I doubt you'd be kicked off. Having said that, you ask if you'd be accepted as a supporter, while not really indicating that you are one. If you are a Paul supporter, why on earth?

If you are a supporter of the Constitution, I hope you'll at least give Dr. Paul the benefit of the doubt in demanding we follow its presciptions for congressional declaration of war, gold and silver money, executive restraint, due process, habeas corpus, etc.

I would imagine people would take exception to your point about association with various isms. You carefully phrased it. But it's pointless unless you were implying endorsement of those isms. Dr. Paul also openly associates with racism, socialism, welfare statism, hypocricy, fascism and other undesirables every day he attends a session of the House of Representatives. So what is your point?

Exponent
12-22-2007, 12:53 PM
Lipo Why Are You Here? Are You A Spy For The Bush Worshipers/ I, For One Resent You Being Here I Changed My Party To Vote For Ron Paul And I Resent You Being Here. All You Want To Do Is Bash. Take Your Ass Somewhere Else I Am Only Speaking For Myself.
Now that is one strange post.

I am glad some more level-headed posters, able to communicate well, got into this thread first. Lipo has not bashed anyone. There might be some very strong disgreements, yes, and most of us will certainly take issue with the claims of association with anti-semitism and racism, but Lipo stated his position in a decent and mature manner. I respect that, and I wish such an attitude more thoroughly pervaded this forum.

But at least you only claim to be speaking for yourself, I'll give you that. (By the way, your capitalization really confuses me. I'm perplexed, but at the same time curiously intrigued regarding the intentions behind such capitalization.)

Dexter_Roseville
12-22-2007, 12:54 PM
Lipo Why Are You Here? Are You A Spy For The Bush Worshipers/ I, For One Resent You Being Here I Changed My Party To Vote For Ron Paul And I Resent You Being Here. All You Want To Do Is Bash. Take Your Ass Somewhere Else I Am Only Speaking For Myself.
Why do you capitalize the first letter of each word? Be nice to new comers, even if their views are different from ours.

While you seem to be ill informed, I'm sure you'll find most of the people here are peaceful and won't force you out.

nate895
12-22-2007, 01:03 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

I have a few disagreements with Dr. Paul, but when was the last time you agreed with anyone else on everything? One of my disagreements is that "blowback" caused 9/11. I disagree because Islam has been on the war path since the 620s, so I think they are the second greatest threat to the West (after neocons, the enemy within). Overall, however, I think he is the greatest of our protectors, we can hold out against the Islamists for at least 50 years with an President who doesn't think they would go after us if we hadn't stationed a couple of tanks there, but we can't hold out for 4 years against the neocons.

Corydoras
12-22-2007, 01:07 PM
Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

The issue is not would he mind, but would other supporters mind... and whether you have the stomach to deal with their attitude.

I'm a paleocon, and sometimes the things that people say on this board make me swear at the computer. I once had an extended exchange with someone who enraged me to the point where I literally could not see straight for a few seconds after every new post I read from this person. I would say that about twice a week I wonder if I'm in the wrong movement, where so many people disagree with me about so much.

But I stick with it, as you see from my post count. I bet you have valuable things to add to the discussions here.

Call me cynical, but I don't think the point of the campaign is to get voters aligned with all or even most of Ron Paul's views; I think the point is to get a majority of people convinced for whatever reasons they have to vote for him. If they want to vote for him because he loves to grow roses and tomatoes, so be it.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who cares about the issues I am most concerned about, and it sounds to me like he is for you as well.

Thank you for being upfront about your concerns. Welcome.

angelatc
12-22-2007, 01:07 PM
I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

Sure, and welcome. I don't think everybody here believes in every single plank of the Ron Paul platform. But if you're discussing policy, no personal attacks. Personally I always find it prudent to try to avoid the word "you' when making points.

As for the economy....might I suggest this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs

Jon S
12-22-2007, 01:09 PM
haha i don't agree with you on anything you said... but i still don't look at is a "neocons" being welcomed. i look at it as VOTERS being welcomed.

Lipo
12-22-2007, 01:30 PM
Lipo,
You are welcome here, but let me tell you you are dead wrong on "open association" with "anti-semitism and racism"

I'm very glad to hear that. I would much rather hear Dr. Paul's clear refutation of both, such that there is no ambiguity whatsoever.

It being understandable that Dr. Paul doesn't want to openly offend his very diverse base of support, whatever its persuasion and for political reasons, one can see why he may not want to do that.

I am obliged to hold it against him until he does.


the other points can be studied and looked into and you can make your own choice on them, but most everyone supports Paul on his steadfast positions.

Fair enough. I disagree with them. Strongly. But I am open to persuasion as I hope you will be open to my own. I may be wrong.

I think it would be a miracle if Ron Paul were elected. I don't doubt for a moment that the instant President Paul was sworn in, the difficulty of administering and governing the United States would kick in, honing down his embrace of radical or revolutionary change against the exigencies of prudent governance. I admire his principled convictions on the Constitution and think he could prove an effective and rational leader.

quantized
12-22-2007, 01:42 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

So what makes you a supporter of Ron Paul? Or are you associating yourself loosely here? Why would you want to support a candidate who apparently has quite a different viewpoint than what you hold... why not other candidates? Would you mind elaborate more on this? I apologies if I sound like I am prying too much.

FYI, I was a Hillary supporter until I caught the Ron Paul Revolution fever.

Cap'n Crunk
12-22-2007, 01:43 PM
I'm very glad to hear that. I would much rather hear Dr. Paul's clear refutation of both, such that there is no ambiguity whatsoever.

It being understandable that Dr. Paul doesn't want to openly offend his very diverse base of support, whatever its persuasion and for political reasons, one can see why he may not want to do that.

I am obliged to hold it against him until he does.



Fair enough. I disagree with them. Strongly. But I am open to persuasion as I hope you will be open to my own. I may be wrong.

I think it would be a miracle if Ron Paul were elected. I don't doubt for a moment that the instant President Paul was sworn in, the difficulty of administering and governing the United States would kick in, honing down his embrace of radical or revolutionary change against the exigencies of prudent governance. I admire his principled convictions on the Constitution and and think he could prove an effective and rational leader.

your going to hold what against him? he's said many times he does not support their views. here's a video of Ron Paul being asked about the donations.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dcLSLGXypMY

Lipo
12-22-2007, 01:43 PM
So what is your point?

My point is that if Dr. Paul wants to be President, he should make some very clear distinctions between what he is and what he is not.

I'm perfectly willing to take his word for it, but he must be equivocal, declaratory and unambiguous.

Cap'n Crunk
12-22-2007, 01:48 PM
My point is that if Dr. Paul wants to be President, he should make some very clear distinctions between what he is and what he is not.

I'm perfectly willing to take his word for it, but he must be equivocal, declaratory and unambiguous.

I think you can figure out what Ron Paul really stands for by just looking at his consistent voting record.

noiseordinance
12-22-2007, 01:49 PM
I still find it mind-blowing that some folks out there supported our invasion of Iraq when, at the same exact moment, we had North Korea telling the UN, "get your damn cameras out of our nuclear facilities." We also have African countries being ruled by gangs of 12 year old children.

I was never a fan of Saddam Husein, but how can anyone justify going after him (besides our interest in oil) when there are many more clear and present dangers going on elsewhere in the world?

Don't forget, Iraq didn't attack us, or threaten us.

LukeNM
12-22-2007, 01:51 PM
It’s funny; I used to hold many of those same beliefs, until I started thinking for myself, and stopped listening to and believing what was being feed to me by the mainstream media. Not one of the things you mention is an original idea. Every one of them can be attributed to someone else thoughts on how this country should think and be.

I feel the founding fathers conspired to development a system of government that promoted the masses and our current government conspires to expand a system of government the promotes the few.

So you are either very rich and gaining from the current establishment or very young and have truly not discovered how the current government is hurting this country and its citizenry. Don’t get me wrong; it is good to support your country, right or wrong. But we have an opportunity to change that.

The wars we fight today are not the wars of our fathers and it is costing us our sons and daughters. These wars have noting to do with our freedom and they have much to do about money.

I caution you however, if you choose to remain a member of these forums – unless you are willing to change your position on many of the issues you mention you better leave now before you become enlightened.

quantized
12-22-2007, 01:54 PM
My point is that if Dr. Paul wants to be President, he should make some very clear distinctions between what he is and what he is not.

I'm perfectly willing to take his word for it, but he must be equivocal, declaratory and unambiguous.

Hmm... on the contrary, Dr Paul is second to none when it comes to clarity of his political positions on issues.. He is the straight shooter in this campaign.. He panders to no party, a complete contrast to Hillary. Which is one of the reason why I decided to support Ron Paul. I encourage you to browse through Ron Paul library;

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/

Cap'n Crunk
12-22-2007, 02:00 PM
I still find it mind-blowing that some folks out there supported our invasion of Iraq when, at the same exact moment, we had North Korea telling the UN, "get your damn cameras out of our nuclear facilities." We also have African countries being ruled by gangs of 12 year old children.

I was never a fan of Saddam Husein, but how can anyone justify going after him (besides our interest in oil) when there are many more clear and present dangers going on elsewhere in the world?

Don't forget, Iraq didn't attack us, or threaten us.

I really feel like so many people have been brainwashed. I was one of them that blindly followed the Republican party and figured they knew what they were doing. There are a lot of people that have put their heart and soul into defending the war in Iraq. (McCain) Their too deep in the sand now to admit they were wrong, even though every piece of evidence has shown that to be the case.

Trust me if this was Clinton's war a lot more Republicans would be against the war, while the Democrats on the other side would be defending it. It's amazing that Bush won the 2000 election running on this humble foreign policy/no nation building policy, criticizing Clinton and Gore for the interventionism foreign policy. Obviously, members of the CFR control out foreign policy and that's why nothing changes regardless of which party gets into office.

Lipo
12-22-2007, 02:00 PM
So what makes you a supporter of Ron Paul?

I admire his embrace of radical change, though I take it for granted that if President Paul were elected, he would come to realize the necessity to tread carefully in this regard.

Change is a good thing as long as you know clearly in which direction is progress.

sasha_2008
12-22-2007, 02:08 PM
This forum is about getting Ron Paul elected President not for people to advocate their own positions or agenda.

Given your post includes the neo-con smear against Dr. Paul, I think your here to hurt the cause of liberty and freedom. You will be a distraction, so I don't welcome you.

iptf2
12-22-2007, 02:12 PM
I Type In Caps Because Its Easier For Me To Do As I Am Not A Great Typist
And A Bit Lazy.

WilliamC
12-22-2007, 02:13 PM
Greetings All,



I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

If you are serious in your belief about foreign interventionism please watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBVHJY-RNSA.

Foreign interventionism is not a traditional Republican position.

If you think the US economy is wealthier than ever before then why is the value of the dollar continuing to go down in value? Inflation does not help the average person in the least.

William C Colley

quantized
12-22-2007, 02:30 PM
I admire his embrace of radical change, though I take it for granted that if President Paul were elected, he would come to realize the necessity to tread carefully in this regard.

Change is a good thing as long as you know clearly in which direction is progress.

Which is more radical? Put a stop to a war which we are no longer able to finance or continue this war until our economy collapse. Is it more radical for us to remain apathetic or do something to remedy? In just a year span, our currency against China yuan drop from 1:8.3 to 1:7.3! We are in debt to foreign countries for Trillions of dollars with China holding abt a fourth of it! Within few years China state-owned companies had grabbed a substantial share in US investment corporations like Morgan Stanley, Blackstone group etc! with the houdisng turmoil now, economist now warns us of a recession up ahead! To me, it is more radical to maintain the status quo. A radical change is the most rational thing to do now, where to maintain the status quo is the most radical thing to do! Most of the politicains are just pandering to the interest groups.. they are not for chnage.. Thats what makes me boil! :mad:

IChooseLiberty
12-22-2007, 02:38 PM
If you think the US economy is wealthier than ever before then why is the value of the dollar continuing to go down in value? Inflation does not help the average person in the least.

Seriously. If I go out and buy all kinds of stuff with my credit cards, I will appear to be doing very well.

The truth is, we've had so much credit extended to us.... far more then ever before and now it's coming time to pay the bill. With interest.

Lipo
12-22-2007, 02:39 PM
The issue is not would he mind, but would other supporters mind... and whether you have the stomach to deal with their attitude.

Fair enough. I'll not win any popularity contest. To those that disagree with me: do your worst. It need not be polite.


I'm a paleocon, and sometimes the things that people say on this board make me swear at the computer. I once had an extended exchange with someone who enraged me to the point where I literally could not see straight for a few seconds after every new post I read from this person. I would say that about twice a week I wonder if I'm in the wrong movement, where so many people disagree with me about so much.

But I stick with it, as you see from my post count. I bet you have valuable things to add to the discussions here.

Thanks very much. I would describe myself as a classical liberal (the 18th century meaning of the word), constitutional textualist (ala Scalia), and an unapologetic defender of western civilization and the values of the enlightenment. Though I am agnostic, I deeply appreciate our judeo-christian culture and its ideals.

WilliamC
12-22-2007, 02:45 PM
Seriously. If I go out and buy all kinds of stuff with my credit cards, I will appear to be doing very well.

The truth is, we've had so much credit extended to us.... far more then ever before and now it's coming time to pay the bill. With interest.


<humor>

Ah, that's my problem, I only pay cash for things. I should go into debt to become wealthy, of course. Why worry about paying for it when someone else will pay for me? Other peoples money, right? Hey, if debt is the key to wealth why don't I use someone else's credit instead of their money? That way I get the goods and they get wealthy from me using their credit!

Anyone wanna give me a credit card in their name? Just leave it for your estate to pay off when you die.

</end humor>

NMCB3
12-22-2007, 03:16 PM
Thanks very much. I would describe myself as a classical liberal (the 18th century meaning of the word), constitutional textualist (ala Scalia), and an unapologetic defender of western civilization and the values of the enlightenment. Though I am agnostic, I deeply appreciate our judeo-christian culture and its ideals.I don't see how you can be those things and believe in the neoconservative platform simultaneously. Classical liberalism and Constitutional adherence are about as far from current policy as you can get. Fortunately you have come to the right place to learn what the ideals you supposedly believe in really mean. Welcome aboard. Be sure to check out the RP Library. :cool:

Oliver
12-22-2007, 03:18 PM
Yeah, pretty much what Kojack said. Say what you like, but don't expect us to join in a Bush love-fest with you or something.

+1

InRonWeTrust
12-22-2007, 03:20 PM
Lipo, I ask you to read this book on foreign policy and the war on terror. Dr Paul specifically recommends this book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Hubris

If you read the book and still continue to hold your same views, I will be shocked.

Cap
12-22-2007, 03:26 PM
Lipo, you are welcome here and you can say whatever you like. Our message and Dr. Pauls message is FREEDOM. We will not stop you like some of the neocon boards do from speaking your mind. We welcome dialouge.

OptionsTrader
12-22-2007, 03:29 PM
This thread is for fishing for an argument.

Mods, move it please.

This is not grassroots.

trey4sports
12-22-2007, 03:31 PM
its not that im against you being here lipo, but don't bring any negative attention to our fundraising or the cause of getting the good Dr. elected.....

other than that, welcome

ronpaulyourmom
12-22-2007, 03:32 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing.

I don't think your the only Ron Paul supporter who agrees with these positions, I myself have not completely embraced the idea of abolishing the Federal Reserve, but I do support Ron Paul's middle-ground solution of competing currencies and cutting spending.


The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.
It's possible that it wont collapse, and productivity is at an all time high, but relative to purchasing power pairity, and relative to our current debt, the situation worse today than many many situationst that we've faced in the past. Also, you should consider that much of our success is built on a combination of technological progress / increased productivity and on borrowing, not necessarily sound fiscal policy or lack of mal-investment. In an ideal world, we could actually have deflation (from increased productivity) and also economic growth. It's entirely possible that whether or not the economy goes into recession / depression or not, that Ron Paul's suggested policies on cutting spending, drastically lowering taxes, and having sound fiscal policy (with or without the Fed) will lead to an even more incredible economy than we have right now.


Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive. I challenge you on this statement, and am willing to defend my positions if you wish to discuss it in detail. Here are a few links:
http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/20/occams-razor-and-ron-paul-tara-thai-expenses/
http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/20/tara-thai-ron-paul-and-white-supremacists-fec-report-data/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c
http://onepeoplesproject.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=154&Itemid=27
http://www.rwned.com



Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?
I'm willing to bet Dr. Paul would accept your support. He doesn't frequent these forums, but I'm happy to have you on board if you decide to get in.

AtomiC
12-22-2007, 03:32 PM
The OP is ignorant.

Read up about the good Dr. Ron Paul here - http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/

You don't seem to know much about politics at all.

Mattsa
12-22-2007, 03:35 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.
Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?


This doesn't make sense.

The constitution says only gold and silver should be legal tender

The constitution says America should not involve itself in foreign entanglements

And yet the neoconservatives (and democrats) have wholeheartedly ignored these parts of the constitution......yet you say you respect Ron Paul's veneration of it.

Your conclusion that America's economy is stronger and wealthier than ever is frankly UNBELIEVEABLY misguided.

Man! I'm English, I've never even lived in the USA and I reckon I know more about the state of America than you do! LOL

Lipo
12-22-2007, 03:36 PM
So what makes you a supporter of Ron Paul? Or are you associating yourself loosely here? Why would you want to support a candidate who apparently has quite a different viewpoint than what you hold... why not other candidates? Would you mind elaborate more on this? I apologies if I sound like I am prying too much.

FYI, I was a Hillary supporter until I caught the Ron Paul Revolution fever.

I think Dr. Paul could be rationally persuaded to change his mind. I sincerely hope he shows the humility and confidence to deduce when he is wrong, as I am convinced he would eventually conclude if he were elected.

A few things I really like about Ron Paul: A desire to enforce immigration law. Nothing fancy, just do it. A nice wall would be dandy, even if unsightly and unpopular.

I like Dr. Paul's veneration of the US Constitution as the supreme authority on the size and scope of the US government and that its meaning is quite clear.

Janet0116
12-22-2007, 03:37 PM
I think Lipo is high as a kite, and likes Dr. Paul because he would decriminalize drugs. Welcome to the Revolution! :)

steph3n
12-22-2007, 03:39 PM
Lipo,

Ron Paul addresses issues in governance in a LONG talk with people the other day about executive privilege.

It is over an hour long but a really good detailed approach


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7493899900883927358

nbhadja
12-22-2007, 03:39 PM
Do you realize the country is 9 trillion dollars in depth? The economy is not doing well, it is about to tank.

It is hard to convince someone with views like you have. I know since I used to hold the views you did only 3 months ago. It took a semester of in depth research for me to realize just how disastrous this Iraq war (and war in general) and the policy of intervention is.

Btw, Alan Greenspan said himself that the Fed Reserve is not necessary anymore.

I suggest you seriously study these types of issues, cause if you do you know your views will rapidly change. Almost all foreign countries oppose our foreign policy and Iraq war.

AtomiC
12-22-2007, 03:40 PM
I think Dr. Paul could be rationally persuaded to change his mind. I sincerely hope he shows the humility and confidence to deduce when he is wrong, as I am convinced he would eventually conclude if he were elected.

A few things I really like about Ron Paul: A desire to enforce immigration law. Nothing fancy, just do it. A nice wall would be dandy, even if unsightly and unpopular.

I like Dr. Paul's veneration of the US Constitution as the supreme authority on the size and scope of the US government and that its meaning is quite clear.

That is where you're wrong.

Ron Paul has stood by his positions for over 30 years and he won't ever back down to make the misinformed or the ignorant happy.

Ron Paul stands for freedom and the constitution. He believes the federal government has too much power and needs to be restricted and more power should be given to the states.

As I have said, look up Ron Paul. I don't believe you have researched his positions very much or at all.

steph3n
12-22-2007, 03:42 PM
Do you realize the country is 9 trillion dollars in DEBT? The economy is not doing well, it is about to tank.



just changed to the proper word

garrettwombat
12-22-2007, 03:44 PM
guys dont be mean... he just hasnt opened his eyes all the way yet...

send him some videos in a PM to watch about the war or on the gold standard or the other things he disagrees with

we need to inform him, he is already receptive to freedom and the constitution...
he just needs that extra push. we were all right there along side him at one point til we saw the truth...

defcreative
12-22-2007, 03:46 PM
This thread is for fishing for an argument.

Mods, move it please.

This is not grassroots.

I agree, bump!

Bryan
12-22-2007, 03:47 PM
Lipo,

Welcome to the forum. This would be a good opportunity for everyone to read the forum guidelines, which include:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=22


+ Promoting agendas alternate to the platform of Dr. Paul will have allowances for established members. Controversial topics should focus on facts whenever possible.


So what this means is that there is room for dialog so long as it doesn't become too much of a distraction for the purpose of the forum, getting Dr. Paul elected. A few pointers to help out, another guideline states:


+ Off-topic posts - Posts that do not relate to the threads intent are subject to being deleted.

So this would mean to be careful to hijack a thread to promote an alternative agenda. This isn't to say that one shouldn't post up to counter bad information with good information that better centers a discussion on facts.

There is room for honest discussion on foreign policy and economic policies in the "Liberty Forest" area- each of these have it's own sub-forum to foster on-topic discussion. When posting here the threads should try to stay on-topic and be based on facts. It's possible to present and discuss facts without declaring something is superior out of the gate. We also have a "Hot Topics" sub-forum for issues that are controversial. If you want to start a thread proclaiming "The Fed is great" - that's one for Hot Topics.


Let's not try to cover all these issue here and now, OK?


:)

Liberty Star
12-22-2007, 03:49 PM
We have people from all political walks coming to join Ron Paul's freedom march, it's truly an American revolution transcending all sorts of boundaries. But 'neocons' are a radical fringe advocating over interventionism in foreign countries militarily and with world view not traditionally aligned with that of the mainstream conservatives. Bush administration allowed them to shape direction of foreign policy as an alliance of interests formed but most conservatives who supported Iraq war few years ago are not ideologically neocons and were truly misled. Bush/Cheney administration helped create an atmosphere of fear post 9/11 where neocons' agenda could be executed without much opposition. Many Americans who may have been on same side as neocons on war issue early on have realized the mistake of that policy and are joining Ron Paul. But I will be surprised if any of the ideological neocons have had a change of religion and are joining Ron Paul camp. They are still lobbying for more wars and often behind smear attacks on Ron Paul using their cohorts in media. They may have been a powerful fringe but luckily with shrinking influence as more and more Americans see through their agendas.


http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html

nist7
12-22-2007, 03:50 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

Ron Paul is actually very pro-Israel. See what Ron Paul and Glenn Beck had to say about Israel and Iran:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIy82pzijow



I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

By saying that you stand in direct opposition to nearly every single economic policy of Dr. Paul would imply that you oppose free market economics. Dr. Paul's "extremism" comes from his wish to have our money backed by something concrete and his opposition to government meddling with the market, hence his dislike for the Federal Reserve. Other than that, Dr. Paul is a strong, strong advocate for open and free market economies. To say that you strongly disagree with Dr. Paul's economic policies would imply that you disagree with open and free market economics.



I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

:cool:


Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

Of course he would accept you...if you are indeed a supporter. Foreign policy is the big, big issue with which the neoconservatives disagree with Ron Paul....and many will not consider a "cut and run" strategy from the mid east.

However, there are some conservatives who disagree with Dr. Paul but have thrown their support behind him anyways:



"After thinking about it quite a bit I have decided to vote/support Ron Paul.

I have never really liked him all that much for many reasons but after giving it careful consideration I have come to the reluctant conclusion that he is the only one to vote for.

A couple of months ago I would have told you that he is very right on 75% of the issues and very wrong on 25% and the 25% was a deal breaker.

After mulling it over I have reversed my thinking and have concluded that that if we have to compromise it is better to compromise on the 25% of the kooky things Paul supports than the 100% of the things the other big government candidates supports.

These are my reasons:

1. If we donít get control of this budget the cost of government is going to kill us all and we will get very few useful things for our trouble. We are going to the poor house folks because we don't really produce anything anymore and we owe our souls to the Chinese and the oil producing Arabs. We have spent a lot more money than we made and soon it will time to pay the piper. Paul is the only candidate that has any credibility on actually reducing the size of government.

2. We canít continue to have the focal point of our foreign policy to insure that the Israelis live well. We need to stop it right now and extract ourselves from the biggest foreign policy blunder this country ever made.

3. We need to stop these wars of intervention. Our business needs to be business instead of bombing Christians, bombing Muslims and going after warlords in Somalia or whatever.

4. It is time that we start reading the Constitution and understanding what freedom is all about instead of catering to every goddamn special interest group in America.

I understand that supporting Paul will cause us to cut and run from Iraq and that is not good. However, that is not our biggest problem right now by far. The biggest problem is the mountain of debt and the erosion of Constitutional freedoms. We will be hurt in the long run a lot more by the road to Socialism than by terrorists.

The rest of the Republican pack is nothing more than big government neocons that will not serve us well. Of course the Democrats are even worse."

stalcottsmith
12-22-2007, 03:51 PM
The constitution says America should not involve itself in foreign entanglements


Strictly speaking, I do not recall the constitution saying anything about this directly. Washington and other founding fathers advocated non-interventionism. They were especially skeptical of getting involved with European powers.

Read Washington's farewell address (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm). This comes right after he admonishes us to "cherish the public credit" -- ie. don't borrow too much:



Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all.

And it continues to explain in detail precisely the problems interventionist policies create. In fact, he goes beyond non-interventionism and advocates a neutrality of heart by warning against maintaining "affections" for other nations. It's serious stuff, to be taken seriously.

TwiLeXia
12-22-2007, 03:51 PM
I disagree with Ron Paul on some issues as well. However, if there's one amazing thing about Ron Paul, it's this.

No matter what you disagree with him on, as a president who abides completely by the Constitution, he will follow it word for word. That means he will NEVER, ever, try to impose his views on you and try to take away your right to believe in what you wish!

garrettwombat
12-22-2007, 03:52 PM
I think Dr. Paul could be rationally persuaded to change his mind

HAHA, PAUL CHANGE HIS MIND??

THAT WOULD BE LIKE BUSH RE-WRITING THE CONSTITUTION.

oh wait...

Liberty Star
12-22-2007, 03:54 PM
We have people from all political walks coming to join Ron Paul's freedom march, it's truly an American revolution transcending all sorts of boundaries. But 'neocons' are a radical fringe advocating over interventionism in foreign countries militarily and with world view not traditionally aligned with that of the mainstream conservatives. Bush administration allowed them to shape direction of foreign policy as an alliance of interests formed but most conservatives who supported Iraq war few years ago are not ideologically neocons and were truly misled. Bush/Cheney administration helped create an atmosphere of fear post 9/11 where neocons' agenda could be executed without much opposition. Many Americans who may have been on same side as neocons on war issue early on have realized the mistake of that policy and are joining Ron Paul. But I will be surprised if any of the ideological neocons have had a change of religion and are joining Ron Paul camp. They are still lobbying for more wars and often behind smear attacks on Ron Paul using their cohorts in media. They may have been a powerful fringe but luckily with shrinking influence as more and more Americans see through their agendas.


http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html


But if there is such change of heart in that original ideological constituency, anyone is welcome to Ron Paul's camp, it's got a big tent. Ron Paul is not a divider but his leadership brings people together.

Dieseler
12-22-2007, 03:55 PM
Mole, Mole, Mole, Mole...

Ignore this guy, ignore his post. Obviously a baiting Troll and does not belong here nor does he deserve the rapid post count and replys he will get if you continue to sponsor his bullshit and attempt to counter his bullshit propaganda against Dr. Paul.

Kick his ass like a little green football.

pcosmar
12-22-2007, 03:56 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

Anyone can be helped, but first you have to want help.
Admitting you are wrong and have been deceived is a start.
Educate yourself. http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
Then we can discuss the state of our Country.

nist7
12-22-2007, 03:56 PM
Lipo,

You also have to understand that if the American people and the Congress and the Senate WANTS to continue the interventionist strategy.....it WILL happen. Ron Paul's attractiveness do not come from so much as his personal beliefs...but his beliefs in the rule of the law.

He is a representative to the voice of the nation. If the Congress declares formal war on Iran, Ron Paul would show 100% support. Even if he personally disagrees with it.

His strength comes not from his own view points but from the Constitution.

pacelli
12-22-2007, 03:56 PM
I Type In Caps Because Its Easier For Me To Do As I Am Not A Great Typist
And A Bit Lazy.

I Hope You Are Not So Lazy That You Forget To Vote.

Grandson of Liberty
12-22-2007, 03:57 PM
But I am open to persuasion as I hope you will be open to my own.


Lipo, welcome to the board. It is the above comment that concerns me. It sounds as if you intend to use this forum to preach against practically every one of Dr. Paul's platforms. Quite frankly, it isn't the place to do that, and I urge everyone here not to waste precious time going back and forth with Lipo.

We are a much more open forum, and you've already been here eons longer than many of us were allowed on other forums such as Hannity's. That said, you're a hair's breath away from ending up on my "ignore" list.

If you truly support him, great, but keep in mind stirring the pot in this forum won't help him get elected.

I will also join in the call for moving this thread to the far reaches of the forum.

Liberty Star
12-22-2007, 03:59 PM
Lipo, hypothetically, if a war funded by US tax payers served interests of Isreal but damaged US interests, will you support it or oppose it?

Liberty Star
12-22-2007, 04:02 PM
Good read.





http://www.nationalreview.com/images/page_2002_buckley.gif

March 02, 2004, 11:34 a.m.

Israel Frenzy
Neocons in the middle.



It is being claimed, ever more widely, that neocon policies are determined by the advantages they bring, manifest or putative, to the State of Israel. Patrick Buchanan, in the current American Conservative, believes this ardently, while the most quoted advocates of neocon militancy, Richard Perle and David Frum, go further than merely to deny that neoconservatism is an Israel First world view. They insist that criticism of neocon policies is, at heart, anti-Semitic.


Richard Perle, co-author with Frum of The End of Evil, old acquaintances remember as being for many years on the public scene as an adamant opponent of Soviet wiles and analyst of the perils of complacent coexistence. Perle's specialty was national defense, and he was there year after year to point out, for instance, that the disarmament fetishists played into the hands of Soviet opportunists. If we unilaterally stopped testing nuclear weapons, we risked Soviet technical advantage. If we stopped deploying theater weapons in Europe, we were threatened by the Soviets' development of their SS-20 missiles and the corresponding advantages in leverage over Western Europe.

It is reasonable to say that Perle's focus on the Communist threat was central to his devising of corollary policies. It is charged now, by e.g. Buchanan, that that focus is now on Israel. That Perle and co-author David Frum rise in the morning with a map of Israel in front of them and decide what ideas, people, countries to encourage, which to discourage, based on their bearing on Israel.

http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200403021134.asp

garrettwombat
12-22-2007, 04:04 PM
LIPO watch all these videos please, all your questions will be answered:

Monetary

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8-W-ef7GmT4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XaxdUPNYj2s

the war

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xcQQ05XtAQ4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UvEil9LukKk

Police State

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9TZBe8npC0A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zJrtUpptYGE


Random video's

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA
http://youtube.com/watch?v=klSek88t54w


and be sure you watch the infomercials
P1. http://youtube.com/watch?v=uQNWHmiGj-k
P2.http://youtube.com/watch?v=wekzQrQfacg&feature=user

nist7
12-22-2007, 04:04 PM
Ronald Reagan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y46xgPUokrg


The troops, through their donations, have shown that they support Ron Paul more than any other GOP candidate.

Ronald Reagan also had a few words to say about Ron Paul.


There’s a reason why our nation’s finest, America’s military men and women, both active and veteran, have given more donations to Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul than any other candidate in either party. As a veteran, he’s the only candidate who understands how to properly defend America from its enemies, “both foreign and domestic.” His strict adherence to the Constitution and reliance on true conservative principles is the winning formula for defeating terrorism abroad.


...


No wonder Ronald Reagan had this to say about Congressman Ron Paul: “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.”

....
http://www.politicallore.com/?p=99

DavyDuke17
12-22-2007, 04:06 PM
People here should try to be more open minded when discussing other views, or we will never pull enough people in to the campaign. If someone disagrees with one of Ron Paul's position, you do not tell them that they are wrong or call them ignorant, but rather that you disagree and state your opinion and facts to back it up.

Also, not everybody that disagrees with Ron Paul and takes a neo-conservative approach to say, foreign policy, has been brainwashed by mass media. To say so without knowing the person is very condescending.

I think we all believe that we have the facts and logic behind us to win any argument that remains solely about the issue. Therefore, there is no reason to put down or add emotion to a discussion that will leave the other person closed-minded and put off. For the same reason, we should remain open minded and not become bogged down with the very hubris that is plaguing our country.

Welcome Lipo, I agree with you that Ron Paul is the very best option to restore our government to its constitutional levels. Hopefully you are concerned enough about our constitution to share Paul's message with your friends and family. Maybe some time we can discuss some of the other issues that you disagree with. There are other forums that are dedicated for issues only, and if you bring your ideas up in a civil manner I am sure we can get a healthy debate going.

literatim
12-22-2007, 04:06 PM
Lipo, we are in a serious situation economically. I compare it to someone living off of credit cards, paying each credit card bill with another credit card. They can live a good life until it implodes. We are over $9 trillion in debt, $1 trillion of it held by China, another $500 billion of it held by Saudi Arabia. We have over $40 trillion in current 'obligations' to the American people in form of welfare programs: Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare. We are spending almost $1 trillion a year in overseas military expenditures.

Our dollar is rapidly declining because they have no other source of money other than print it. It is now worth less than the Canadian dollar. We borrow more money to pay the interest we owe on all that debt which increases our debt further. Every dime you pay into Income Tax goes to pay interest on our debt.

Lipo
12-22-2007, 04:08 PM
its not that im against you being here lipo, but don't bring any negative attention to our fundraising or the cause of getting the good Dr. elected.....

other than that, welcome

Let the chips fall where they may. I've still not decided for any candidate - though I have contributed to both John McCain and Fred Thompson campaigns. Frankly, all the Republican candidates (with the possible exception of Huckabee) look pretty good to me. Each are good for sometimes different reasons.

I'm still kicking the tires as it were. My initial top three candidates were: Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson and Tom Tancredo. With Hunter and Tancredo out, Ron Paul deserved another look.

I kinda like John McCain but would be just as happy with Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani.

isufferfromronpaulfever
12-22-2007, 04:10 PM
Let the chips fall where they may. I've still not decided for any candidate - though I have contributed to both John McCain and Fred Thompson campaigns. Frankly, all the Republican candidates (with the possible exception of Huckabee) look pretty good to me. Each are good for sometimes different reasons.

I'm still kicking the tires as it were. My initial top three candidates were: Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson and Tom Tancredo. With Hunter and Tancredo out, Ron Paul deserved another look.

I kinda like John McCain but would be just as happy with Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani.

Lipo... welcome. Do you acknowledge a media blackout of Ron Paul and if so, what is your take on it?

me3
12-22-2007, 04:10 PM
Yes, Ron Paul is really anti-semitic. He reveres Mises and Rothbard, two Jewish economists. :rolleyes:

Supporting the war doesn't make someone a neocon, being uninformed, or easily persuaded by stereotypes is.

literatim
12-22-2007, 04:11 PM
Yes, Ron Paul is really anti-semitic. He reveres Mises and Rothbard, two Jewish economists. :rolleyes:

You forgot Ayn Rand who he named his son Rand after. :)

Dave Wood
12-22-2007, 04:12 PM
I was a closet Tancredo supporter:o Really sorry to see him go. The rest of them havent earned my trust and I think that is exactly the reason I am part of Pauls camp. I simply trust the man to make the right decisions.

literatim
12-22-2007, 04:16 PM
I liked Tancredo minus the war issue, but his endorsement of Romney made me question any respect I had for him.

Anyway, as far as whether Lipo is welcome or not. We welcome anyone, even those that don't support Ron Paul.

LibertyForAll
12-22-2007, 04:28 PM
Welcome aboard!

Here you will find all types of people. The growing support for Ron Paul I believe has more to do with his personal integrity, clarity, and stance against big government. Americans are sick and tired of politicians lying to us. Americans are sick and tired of the TV lying to us and telling us who to vote for. Americans are sick and tired of being sick and tired, and for Once we have someone running for President who has moral fiber and true character. Help spread the word!

amy31416
12-22-2007, 04:32 PM
Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.


Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

The "open association" with anti-semitism and racism is false. He got a donation from a white supremacist, refused to return it on ethical grounds. End of story. See this video and tell me if he's a racist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i97Ia1xMyBo

And the answer as to whether or not RP would accept you as a supporter-- of course he would. He doesn't screen anyone as to their beliefs, nor does he judge you. You are the judge of yourself so long as you don't hurt anyone else or destroy their property.

That being said, his supporters here will probably bash you somewhat while others will welcome you, we are not all as steadfast, but we are learning.

EvoPro
12-22-2007, 06:33 PM
On Iraq, my take is the same as Andrew Napolitano's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWThTWBZqBg). "We can not thrust democracy on these people. The best we can hope for is a stable government."

I wish Ron would use this statement. I agree with him on practically everything, but I don't always agree with how he presents his stance. I believe and I know Ron believes that Iraq will stabilize if we give them their country back.

It is ridicules to think we need to be interventionists. We should only fight when necessary. No one would dare attack Israel, because they know that the US congress would declare war and we would fight and win decisively.

Intervention in today's world makes us less safe not only because it stirs the pot, but also because it makes us far less prosperous.


Dr. Paul's quote on Beck's show was great:

"You know, we stood down the Soviets. They had 40,000 nuclear weapons. We had Khrushchev pounding on the desk saying we will bury you. He was capable of doing it.

The al Qaeda does not have an army, they don`t have a Navy, they don`t have intercontinental ballistic missiles, they don`t have weapons of mass destruction, they don`t have a country. They`re very, very weak people in that sense. But they have determination. The determination comes from being provoked. And they have to have some reason to galvanize enough hatred to come here and do what they have done.

So, no, it`s not going to be -- if I bring the troops home overnight, it`s not going to eliminate what has been going on for quite a few decades. But I`ll tell you what, it`s going it be a lot better. And if we think that they only come here because we`re free and prosperous, we will never solve this problem."

We are going to be under threat because if we -- Let`s say the fighting quits in Iraq and we keep those 14 bases and an embassy as big as the Vatican and think that won`t annoy people? It will be a thorn in their side and we will be under as much threat. We are an easy target over there and they`re quite satisfied for killing Americans in Iraq. But if we`re no longer an easy target, they`ll come back here. That is what my fear is."

thisisgiparti
12-22-2007, 06:46 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

Most Ron Paul supporters like Israel and Jews. Ron Paul has a very good endorsement from Ha'aretz that ran on November 7, 2007. Lew Rockwell's blog also gave some good accounts of Ron Paul's history of championing Israel's cause especially when Israel went after the Osirak reactors. Ron Paul supported that despite strong criticism at the time.

Ron Paul often goes against popular opinion; he sticks to his principles. These are the hallmarks of an effective leader, and I think he could lead the US and her allies in a new and more diplomatic trend that could bring about peace. This is what everyone wants, and it is at the core of Ron Paul's popularity. There is nothing divisive about his stance.

The first war the US fought dealt with entitlements and foreign aid. The Barbary pirates demanded tribute from the US or their supply routes would be attacked. Jefferson went to the Congress and got support to go after the pirates when they marauded our ships. This is the proper way to fight wars, and the correct attitude toward foreign aid. The US taxpayer should not bribe foreign governments to behave responsibly. It ends badly. I could cite Pakistan, who received $10 billion this year and then devolved into a military dictatorship - pretty scary for a country with nukes!

Iran has no nuclear capability, and I'm leery of politicians crying out for 'regime change' again. Bragging that 2003 was a violent deterrent to pursuing their program, so that's a reason to keep bearing down on them is ludicrous and tyrannical. Several US military experts have (rightly, I think) predicted disaster, if we pursue war with Iran. Our troops are exhausted, we face a dollar crisis and can only finance this war with loans from Red China, not to mention it is UNNECESSARY right now. War should be a last resort. Yes, I agree the Iranian president is a loudmouth and a demagogue; he probably won't get re-elected. This is a country where 2/3 of the population is under 30 and extremely well read (Iran is ranked fourth in world-wide participation in the blogosphere.) Think about this and bear in mind that 1) there is no such thing as a clean strike 2) any attack on a sovereign country brings up nationalist sentiment, so no country will ever greet brutes as liberators 3) Iran signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and has a right to continue an enrichment for peaceful purposes.

About economic policy, Ron Paul advocates a dual monetary currency, or a competing USD that is backed by precious metals. This is Constitutional. The twentieth century was a nightmare (because of the Federal Reserve, if you ask me) but if you take away inflation then with that goes the power of governments to wage endless wars or give ill-advised and dubious loans to countries that will never be able to repay them. This is a policy which paved the way for dictators like Idi Amin and Saddam Hussein, who we not only happily did business with, but in Saddam's case brought to power and heavily armed with the most dangerous weapons possible. I dislike George Bushes 41 and 43 for this reason, and I disagree with the neoconservatives that these measures are necessary as well as immoral. Secrecy goes against democracy. I don't believe a world of this making deserves to be policed and enforced. That goes against the founders' principles. These men were no strangers to these problems when they drafted our Constitution. Thomas Jefferson would probably have a similar position to Ron Paul's regarding foreign policy. I think Ron Paul would do whatever is necessary to protect our country, and I am behind him 100% for being our next POTUS.

That being said, welcome to the reLOVEution. What is it you DO like about Ron Paul? :)

Corydoras
12-22-2007, 06:48 PM
What I would ask you to think about seriously, Lipo, is whether you think the other candidates care not only about the Constitution but about our liberties in general-- for example, about our privacy and about the ease of declaring martial law. Here are my concerns that brought me to Ron Paul that make him unique in my eyes:

Ron Paul opposes the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the Real ID Act, and HIPAA, and is profoundly disturbed by the consequent erosion of habeas corpus, posse comitatus, and medical privacy.

I won't barrage you with sources just now. I figure that if you start to look into this, you will start a thread. Let me give you just one video that dramatizes the situation-- but I assure you that there is substance backing up its alarming tone if you just look for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl1VIhdpl4c (What We Chose to Ignore)

pyroboy4206
12-22-2007, 07:14 PM
[quote]
I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?[quote]

I don't know about the other people here. But the message Ron Paul seems to send out is a very accepting vibe. His message is a broader message than those that are on tv being talked about by the media. His messages are multi-layered. And a lot of them are very strong messages. Different people relate to him in different ways. I would think that one line-obeying the constitution- is the best anyone can promise. I assume even though people have differences in oppinions, races, or whatever, we all have the same goal. That goal is to be granted equal and fair rights. No matter what your view be on other things, it is necessary for people who believe in the constitution to be united. I think that many of his supporters are in favor of personal rights.. I say this dude, I think you are welcome here, as much as i at least..

pyroboy4206
12-22-2007, 07:16 PM
I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.
Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

I don't know about the other people here. But the message Ron Paul seems to send out is a very accepting vibe. His message is a broader message than those that are on tv being talked about by the media. His messages are multi-layered. And a lot of them are very strong messages. Different people relate to him in different ways. I would think that one line-obeying the constitution- is the best anyone can promise. I assume even though people have differences in oppinions, races, or whatever, we all have the same goal. That goal is to be granted equal and fair rights. No matter what your view be on other things, it is necessary for people who believe in the constitution to be united. I think that many of his supporters are in favor of personal rights.. I say this dude, I think you are welcome here, as much as i at least..

han_solo
12-22-2007, 10:51 PM
I think there is more than enough room for people who differ with a candidate in one or more topics... There is no such thing as a PERFECT candidate.

Myself, I believe that after having done my own extensive research into the nature of the threat of Islam, that perhaps Ron Paul is misguided. The true threat we face is from Islam itself, there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim...the whole religion was founded by a warlord pedophile who went on raids of conquest to pillage, murder, and rape. The whole purpose of Islam is to take over the entire world and unite it all under the Islamic banner and rules.

BUT, other than that issue, I am totally sick of Republicans like Bush who are nothing more than democrat-lite(tm) and just more big spending socialists who just happen to be a little stronger on defense.

I have a well worn copy of "conscience of a conservative", most all of Bill Buckley's books, and strongly believe that our country has gone downhill since FDR got away with threating the supreme court into submission and successfully destroyed the 10th amendment which made the federal government turn into the overbearing piece of crap it is today.


Ron Paul is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT on target for his domestic agendas, and 99% on this foreign policies. We do have to end all this welfare, end our entanglements, get the hell out of that dictator cesspool UN, and be much more careful about what they hell we get involved in...I just think we have to be tough and on guard against these crazy Islamic nutjobs with world domination dreams in their eyes from getting too much power or nuclear weapons.


So...yeah come on in and join the crowd. There is really no other place for REAL CONSERVATIVES to turn...certainly there is not any room in the mainstream socialist republican tent anymore.

driller80545
12-22-2007, 11:07 PM
Sure, welcome to the forums, Lipo, and don't worry about a little difference of opinion. In order to introduce you to how open minded we are here I suggest that the first thread you join in on be one that includes "conspiracy" in its title. This should be a good place to air a difference of opinion.

Gimme Some Truth
12-22-2007, 11:14 PM
As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?


I dont understand how you can appreciate and support Ron Paul for the fact he would run the government in a strict constitutional manner , when practically everything you oppose about him is unconstitutional.

Too many people say they love and agree with the constitution when they so obviously dont. Its fake patriotism ,imo.


As for you hanging around on the forum ... Its fine with me . Its what freedom is all about.

Enzo
12-22-2007, 11:54 PM
Hi Lipo. Welcome.

I think you might have been looking for this forum:

http://www.debateforums.net/vb/

full of people just foaming at the mouth to be part of a lively debate.

As opposed to thousands of people working toward the same goal here vs.................. you

fgd
12-23-2007, 12:06 AM
Even if you're a rabid Hillary supporter, and you have:
-Donated to Paul's campaign
-Canvassed for him
-Registered as a Republican
-Committed to voting for him in the primaries

I don't think anyone here will not welcome your support.

Have you done any of these things? Do you have any intention of doing any of these things?

Lipo
01-08-2008, 02:41 PM
Thanks to everyone who was kind enough to respond to my question. I had hoped to be Ron Paul's one and only neocon supporter. I am aware of no other!

I took the plunge a few days ago and made a $100 contribution to the Ron Paul campaign.

Alas, this appears to have been a big mistake.

Having previously observed Ron Paul's open association with neo nazis and white supremacists, I was mollified with the rationale that Ron Paul himself could not and did not hold their views and that "open association" in this context was merely a reflection of his Libertarian views.

I was wrong.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca