Goodbye Ron Paul

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Martin, Sep 15, 2007.

  1. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    I admire Alan Keyes very much, but the same problem, no chance at the nomination. The Republican nominee has no chance at election.
     
  3. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==After voting for Bush in '00, I will NEVER again vote for someone just because they "can" win. I will vote for someone because I agree with them. I may not agree with them on everything, but if I agree with them on the overall issue I will support them. I still support Ron Paul's position on the War in Iraq. I don't, however, support his position on the War in Afgahanstan (sp?). Alan Keyes' position on the war in Iraq is somewhat different than mine. However, with Keyes, the War in Iraq becomes part of a larger landscape of issues that must be dealt with. I believe our nation is in a deep moral crisis. That crisis cannot be solved through politics (etc). However we need a spokesman, and Alan Keyes is that spokesman. His campaign will bring back to the table important issues that the Republican Party is ready to abandon by supporting people like Giuliani, McCain, Thompson, and Romney. We need to give voice to the thousands of innocent children who are being murdered, by their parents, every year in this country. We need to have a limited (small) federal government. Yes we need to deal with terrorism, yes we need to find a way to get out of the mess Bush has created in Iraq, yes we need to deal with the enviornment, but their are other very important issues that are being ignored. Ron Paul is pro-life, Alan Keyes is pro-life, and both support limited federal powers. Therefore I will support Alan Keyes whether he wins or not and I will continue to support Ron Paul whether he wins or not. I would love to see a Keyes/Paul, or Paul/Keyes, ticket in '08. I know that will not happen (for several reasons) but it would be the best of both worlds for me. Alan Keyes has been my choice for president since that late 90s. Nothing has changed.

    http://www.alankeyes.com/
     
    #3 Martin, Sep 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2007
  4. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    With Thompson and Keyes both in the race, the pro-life faction of the GOP is indeed not dead. Good news. :thumbs:
     
  5. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,539
    Likes Received:
    208
    Well said, Martin!

    The only wasted vote is the one you didn't cast.
     
  6. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    I could vote for Keys. those who think a GOP canidate cannot win this election will be greatly surprised.
     
  7. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've supported Keyes in the past, and I can support him now. If Newt doesn't run Keyes is my choice. I know Newt has issues, but his knowledge and commitment to America is huge. Gingrich/Keyes perhaps. No other GOP candidate can return America to greatness, IMO.
     
  8. Ivon Denosovich

    Ivon Denosovich
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now if we could only get Keyes and Paul to run a ticket...

    LANDSLIDE, BABY! ;)
     
  9. Alex Quackenbush

    Alex Quackenbush
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alan Keyes is an intellectual and philosopher but his pragmatism is sorely lacking. Keyes would be far more inept that anything people imagine Bush has been (I am not saying Bush has or hasn't been, just referring to comments in the MsM and other places about Bush's style).

    Executive leadership requires strengths that are not displayed in Keyes. Keyes' strengths are better found in writing, speaking and possibly as a member of a body who would contribute a unique analysis on issues. That is where Keyes' strength lies. But as Executive he simply would fail and be caught up in too much reflection and detail normally reserved for subordinates. This is not to say a President should not be reflective but the style of Keyes' thought is so tedious that it would be self-defeating as opposed to the kind of sound reflection and thought demonstrated by Ronald Reagan.
     
  10. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Keyes is okay but Paul has no support in the GOP.

    Keyes sort of extinguished himself in Illinois against Obama. He critized Hillary for running in New York and then left Maryland to run in Illinois and got trounced by Obama for being a carpetbagger.

    As for Ron Paul, do you really think that the GOP is such a machine that they will vote for whomsoever is on the ticket? I

    In other words, Ron Paul, mostly a Libertarian who caucuses with the GOP, has no support among the rank and file GOP--we don't care for Libertarian ideas such as the isolationism of fortress America, the legalization of drugs, prostitution and same-sex marriage, the failure to put murderers to death as commanded in Scripture, and the refusal to support the Reagan idea and policy of a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. You can't just allow some evils to flourish and say that you yourself have plenty of money and therefore are not affected. Peter Marshall once used the illustration of a man who had a nice, green yard with everything about his house immaculately clean. However, he could not take his little baby child out into the yard because the neighbors had a pig sty for a yard and home, and the flies from them would come over and land all over the little baby child.
     
  11. Ivon Denosovich

    Ivon Denosovich
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    And then the pig ate the little baby child. Insert hysterics here.
     
    #11 Ivon Denosovich, Sep 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2007
  12. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    It was from a sermon of Peter Marshall

    Ivon, the illustration was from a sermon of Peter Marshall's dealing, among other things, with what kind of nation we were going to have when the troops came home from World War II.

    We have a lot of Libertarians in Indiana. The siphon off votes from the GOP. They never have a chance but they always want a live and let live society. Well, they havelive and let live in Amsterdam. With weak police in Indy, we are already close enough to Amserdam without legalizing all the things that the Libertarians want legalized.

    Who, among the GOP, would vote for Ron Paul? He is not a team player--look at his history in Texas where he ran against the slate.
     
  13. Ivon Denosovich

    Ivon Denosovich
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    church mouse guy, I agree that lbtns "steel" from the GOP and also that they are completely unelectable. My only point is that I defend them philosophically. And I take it this would be the appropriate venue to do so.
     
  14. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Tell me

    Tell me, Ivon, where do you agree with them philosophically? I sincerely don't understand why a live-and-let-live society would not be worse than the mess we have now, especially in big citites like Indianapolis, which is ridden with crime and vice and infested with religious cults.

    By the way, thanks for the nice discussion, on your part, Ivon.
     
  15. Ivon Denosovich

    Ivon Denosovich
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, church mouse guy, I have no faith in social engineering (affecting behavior) so it isn't a matter of not wanting to make the world a better place to live, but rather a settled acknowledgment that private spiritual problems necessitate private spiritual solutions. Take the escalating divorce rate for instance. Unless one believes that divorce is a product of legislation then it stands to reason that there is no legislative solution. Also, many of the social ills that plague us are not logical. Racism, for example. It also stands to reason that if there is not a logical reason for a problem then there is no logical solution.

    It's not that I see disaster itself as preferable. I do see cost efficient disaster as preferable to the bureaucratic variety. Philosophically, I don't see man as molded by environment. I see environment molded by man. This makes the law a mere reflection of social values, not the origin.
     
    #15 Ivon Denosovich, Sep 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2007
  16. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    If things are as they are now, the Democrat will win. If Giulilani runs against Clinton (what a nightmare), Clinton will carry a substantial part of the South.

    Only George Bush could set up the perfect conditions for the Democrats to win in 08. The Democrats have no ideas, all they can do is run on the failures of Republicans, and boy, the door is wide open. If the Democrats were not so pathetic, it would be fair to say the Republicans deserve to lose. Aside from the three ring circus at the White House, Craig and Vitter make a mockery of a party that is suppose to mirror Christian values.

    I hope you are right. I hope the Republicans nominate a TRUE conservative (unlike Bush) who truly believes in Christian values and knows how to govern.

    Martin, your post was very good. One thing puzzles me, and your posts are ones I always pay attention to because they are well thought out, why do you think Thompson is not pro life? Is just inaction on his part like George Bush?
     
  17. Ivon Denosovich

    Ivon Denosovich
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    For the record, church mouse guy, it has been a pleasure sparring with you. Whatever is the solution to America's moral ineptitude, you are certainly a part of it. :)
     
  18. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Comments made above:

    "Alan Keyes is an intellectual and philosopher but his pragmatism is sorely lacking"

    "In other words, Ron Paul, mostly a Libertarian who caucuses with the GOP, has no support among the rank and file GOP"

    Both are very good reasons to support both Keyes and Paul!!

    _____________________________________

    Church Mouse Guy said (about Ron Paul):
    "the refusal to support the Reagan idea and policy of a constitutional amendment to ban abortion"

    ==The facts do not agree with your statement. Ron Paul is pro-life and supports the over-turning of Roe v. Wade.
    http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/

    "Keyes sort of extinguished himself in Illinois against Obama."

    ==Personally I thought Keyes wiped the stage with Obama. The problem was not Keyes, the problem was an electorate who was/is more interested in politicians who promise them the moon and make them feel good instead of standing behind the Constitution and the Bible. Truth is very unpopular in modern America.

    "we don't care for Libertarian ideas such as the isolationism of fortress America"

    ==Of course when one realizes that founders like George Washington were somewhat isolationists any objection to that argument starts to fall apart. The objections fall apart even more when one examines the disasters that our patrolling the world has caused. We can trade with other countries, do business with them, but we need to stay out of their problems.

    "prostitution and same-sex marriage"

    ==Prostitution should be a state/local issue (not federal). Gay marriage does not exist. God created marriage, God defined/defines marriage, and no sinful mortal can redefine marriage. Anyone who tries has condemned themselves (Heb 13:4). I don't oppose a constitutional amendment against gay-marriage, I just wonder if such action is needed against something that does not exist. I think states should create these amendments and make these laws and the federal government and courts should stay out of it. They have NO constitutional authority on this issues. Period.

    "You can't just allow some evils to flourish and say that you yourself have plenty of money and therefore are not affected"

    ==So where is your support for a constitutional amendment banning blasphemy, adultery, lying, false religion, and other such evils? Laws and government cannot solve moral problems. We need to abide by our constitution, give the power back to the states, shrink the size of government, end all nation building, and punish abortion doctors according to current laws (first degreee murder), etc.
     
  19. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    double post
     
  20. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==I view Thompson as a light weight. He is just another George W Bush in my view. He may very well be pro-life in his personal beliefs, but I wonder if he has the ability to put his beliefs on abortion (etc) into real action? Bush has not, and I have no reason to believe Thompson would either.

    Another reason I don't support Thompson is because I have not seen him explain his views in detail. I see no passion in him.
     

Share This Page

Loading...