Ron Paul should publicly challenge the candidates on their patriotism .............

[Phantom]

.......... at the next debate in Simi Valley, California, at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on January 30th, 2008, Ron Paul should ask each candidate why they have chosen to abandon “that goddam piece of paper (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pieceofpaper.php),” the Constitution (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/usconst.htm) and the Bill of Rights (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/rights1.htm).

If he can chip away at their patriotism in this debate, I think it would garner him a lot of swing voters.

Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney, Thompson and McCain have already shown us which nation they are more patriotic too and it is time to expose these neo cons for the traitors they are.

[plb]

I'd love to see RP post a video on youtube for all to see issuing a debate challenge to all other candidates....How awesome would that be? No biased media involved ...Questions from the people, for the people. Why doesn't he do this actually?

[phixion]

There's so much ammo on all of them which begs the question why it isn't being used - and if Ron is planning to use it to go in to Super Tuesday on national prime-time TV spots.

I'm pretty sure this is what's planned and it would align with how he's campaigned in the past.

Did the grass-roots raise enough for him?

The jury is out.

Pete

[pacelli]

.......... at the next debate in Simi Valley, California, at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on January 30th, 2008, Ron Paul should ask each candidate why they have chosen to abandon “that god damn piece of paper (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pieceofpaper.php),” the Constitution (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/usconst.htm) and the Bill of Rights (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/rights1.htm).

If he can chip away at their patriotism in this debate, I think it would garner him a lot of swing voters.

Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney, Thompson and McCain have already shown us which nation they are more patriotic too and it is time to expose these neo cons for the traitors they are.

The next debate is January 24 in Florida on MSNBC. I think challenging McCain's patriotism would seriously backfire given that most voters still hold him in high regard due to his POW experiences.

[Tronchaser]

Yeah, I think that's a mistake.. that won't persuade people over to our side. All of the candidates have either served in the military or served in some governmental role which they will point out if they are questioned like that.

Not a good idea, imo.

[Phantom]

Hi pacelli


I think challenging McCain's patriotism would seriously backfire given that most voters still hold him in high regard due to his POW experiences.

Fair point but that can be bypassed when it comes to debating foreign policy. Ron Paul already did that in the SC debate by mentioning how McCain made a comment about staying in Iraq for one hundred years (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/04/john-mccain-lets-stay-in-iraq-for-100-years/) and pointing out he was willing to sacrifice 5 generations of Americans, that includes McCain supporters and their families as well, in this illegal and violent crusade in Iraq.

Can you imagine the cost of funding such a crusade? Is that a burden Americans want to pass on to their unborn, who will continue to have to do the same when they grow up and plan to have children? It's time to expose this neo-cons.

McCain has been to war and has seen the ugly side of it, including being tortured in a P.O.W. camp in vietnam, yet this guy would be happy to see America in ever lasting crusades. Where is his patriotism to the constitution? Do we really need another president of America who treats the constitution as "just a goddam piece of paper (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pieceofpaper.php)"?

Here is a link to an interesting article covering issues exposing McCain's weaknesses. Exposing John McCain (http://theunknowncandidate.blogspot.com/2006/03/exposing-john-mccain.html).

So here's what you need to know about John McCain.

He isn't a straight talker. His flip-flopping on tax cuts, his call to send troops we don't have to Iraq and his endorsement of the South Dakota anti-abortion legislation even while claiming that he would find a way around that legislation's central provision show that he's a politician as slippery and evasive as, well, George W. Bush.

He isn't a moderate. Mr. McCain's policy positions and Senate votes don't just place him at the right end of America's political spectrum; they place him in the right wing of the Republican Party.

And he isn't a maverick, at least not when it counts. When the cameras are rolling, Mr. McCain can sometimes be seen striking a brave pose of opposition to the White House. But when it matters, when the Bush administration's ability to do whatever it wants is at stake, Mr. McCain always toes the party line.

It's worth recalling that during the 2000 election campaign George W. Bush was widely portrayed by the news media both as a moderate and as a straight-shooter. As Mr. Bush has said, "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

[melianthus]

"Patriotism is the last refuge..."

Ron Paul would never play that card. This campaign isn't about him. It's about the message.

[damon04]

If he could debate just one or two other candidates at one time, he would crush them...

Perhaps take on Romney and Ghouliani one day, then McCant and Huckabum the next

[Crickett]

If he could debate just one or two other candidates at one time, he would crush them...

Perhaps take on Romney and Ghouliani one day, then McCant and Huckabum the next

yeah, but we are lucky when he gets to debate at all..

[AlbemarleNC0003]

Who says he already hasn't?

http://www.ronpauliswrong.com/

[pacelli]

Hi pacelli



Fair point but that can be bypassed when it comes to debating foreign policy. Ron Paul already did that in the SC debate by mentioning how McCain made a comment about staying in Iraq for one hundred years (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/04/john-mccain-lets-stay-in-iraq-for-100-years/) and pointing out he was willing to sacrifice 5 generations of Americans, that includes McCain supporters and their families as well, in this illegal and violent crusade in Iraq.

Can you imagine the cost of funding such a crusade? Is that a burden Americans want to pass on to their unborn, who will continue to have to do the same when they grow up and plan to have children? It's time to expose this neo-cons.

McCain has been to war and has seen the ugly side of it, including being tortured in a P.O.W. camp in vietnam, yet this guy would be happy to see America in ever lasting crusades. Where is his patriotism to the constitution? Do we really need another president of America who treats the constitution as "just a goddam piece of paper (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pieceofpaper.php)"?

Here is a link to an interesting article covering issues exposing McCain's weaknesses. Exposing John McCain (http://theunknowncandidate.blogspot.com/2006/03/exposing-john-mccain.html).

So here's what you need to know about John McCain.

He isn't a straight talker. His flip-flopping on tax cuts, his call to send troops we don't have to Iraq and his endorsement of the South Dakota anti-abortion legislation even while claiming that he would find a way around that legislation's central provision show that he's a politician as slippery and evasive as, well, George W. Bush.

He isn't a moderate. Mr. McCain's policy positions and Senate votes don't just place him at the right end of America's political spectrum; they place him in the right wing of the Republican Party.

And he isn't a maverick, at least not when it counts. When the cameras are rolling, Mr. McCain can sometimes be seen striking a brave pose of opposition to the White House. But when it matters, when the Bush administration's ability to do whatever it wants is at stake, Mr. McCain always toes the party line.

It's worth recalling that during the 2000 election campaign George W. Bush was widely portrayed by the news media both as a moderate and as a straight-shooter. As Mr. Bush has said, "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

Thanks Phantom for your well-researched and educational reply :) I agree that since he has been in the Senate, McCain has been an absolute insult to the integrity of the United States and a mark of dirt on the American flag. I agree that he is a war monger and will continue Bush's legacy of lies and unfulfilled promises. I watched the SC debate with pure disgust as McCain spoke of needing some "straight talk". When that buffoon says "straight talk", you know the next words coming out of his mouth will be more crooked than his last sentence.

I think RP did a great job of appropriately addressing his 100-year-in-Iraq comment during the debate, and the split-screen of McCain at that moment showed him defensively gesturing with his arms as if to say, "So what?"

I think RP should definitely not let up on holding McCain and the other candidates accountable-- but as a psychologist I also know that if he were to say, " And I challenge your patriotism because of .....", the emotional reaction of the viewing voters would be guided by years of media-induced opinion manipulation. The specific phrase, "I challenge your patriotism" is akin (emotionally) to calling someone a traitor. It is an irrational response, but, one that could hurt Dr. Paul's chances.

I do agree that Paul needs to continue to carefully point out the fallacies of the other candidates- I just don't want him to turn off people who might be considering backing his candidacy.

I'd like to see Paul use more of his personal life during his responses at debates - speaking about his career as an OB/GYN for health care questions, and his time in the Air Force as a flight surgeon for military-based questions. These 'human elements' help voters to emotionally connect with his message.

[freedom-maniac]

.......... at the next debate in Simi Valley, California, at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on January 30th, 2008, Ron Paul should ask each candidate why they have chosen to abandon “that goddam piece of paper (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pieceofpaper.php),” the Constitution (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/usconst.htm) and the Bill of Rights (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/rights1.htm).

If he can chip away at their patriotism in this debate, I think it would garner him a lot of swing voters.

Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney, Thompson and McCain have already shown us which nation they are more patriotic too and it is time to expose these neo cons for the traitors they are.

What do you mean they're unpatriotic? They all support the PATRIOT Act, and make sure their blind fold/flag is always properly hoisted in front of their eyes.