Why Joseph Farrah will not support Ron Paul

Ultimately, Joseph Farah can not support Ron Paul as Ron Paul is not a neoconservative.

 

That about sums it up. I see this "Islamofascism" term all the time these days, I wish that the people who use it would explain exactly how Islam is fascist. Fascism being the combining of business and government (corporatism, Mussolini's definition) and all. I think the current U.S. government regime comes closer to fitting that description than any Muslim regime. Probably a good thing for Mr. Farah and the neoconservatives that most folks that use the term "Islamofascism" don't actually know what fascism is. But hey...it is a very clever buzzword!

 

They can't explain the word as they have no argument for it. The term is used by propagandists like Farah or by the useful idiots that follow them.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=39732&highlight=islamofascism

 

GWB has done what any good President in his position would have done, to protect our citizens.

It is the leftists in our govt. namely the radical democrats that intensely desire to act as fascists. They constantly keep the pot stirring on racism, they want the concentration of power to be in the Supreme's hands, and foment hatred of, and attack big business on a regular basis. They want desperately to put confiscatory taxation on big oil, and look what they did to the investors during the attack on MSFT. They coddle enviro-whacko's in a never ending call for cessation of domestic oil production.

 

One thing I have noticed about Ron Paul. He has a cult like following of internet supporters that are the most narrow-minded bunch I have ever encountered.

Besides being a multi-term congressmember from The Great State of Texas, Ron Paul was also the 1988 Libertarian candidate for president, and people with Libertarian ideas have long found a home online. The no-rules and no-authorities nature of the technology world and the Internet is a natural fit for the politically independent, and early conservative websites such as Free Republic bubbled with Libertarian-influenced opinions. By the late 90s, when I was helping to put together a massive index of political websites for the now-defunct PoliticalInformation.com, Libertarian sites, independent or party-associated, were extremely active and seemed to outnumber sites associated with the more traditional political parties and their issues.
Though the rise of political blogs and the netroots in this decade has diluted the place of Libertarians online, even today the audiences of tech-heavy sites such as Slashdot and Digg show a fondness for civil liberties and anti-authoritarian ideas: one sign of Paul's rise has been the large number of votes for stories about him on Digg. Though Libertarians are a small minority of the Republican electorate, they can make a disproportionate amount of noise online.


But he is still doomed:

Like Howard Dean, Paul Tsongas, Jerry Brown, Ralph Nader, Steve Forbes, Alan Keyes and Gary Bauer, Ron Paul will not be the next President of the United States, and for a lot of the same reasons. Purist candidates attract purist voters, but most of the electorate would prefer not to go down with the ship (Goldwater in '64!). While they may flirt with a purist, in the end they'll vote for the candidate who most closely matches their views WHILE ALSO having a good chance of winning. Running for president gives a niche candidate a powerful platform for putting out opinions (hello, Kucinich), but they tend to be in niches in the first place for a reason. I don't know whom the Republicans will select as their '08 standard-bearer, but I know who it won't be: Ron Paul.

http://www.techpresident.com/node/380

 

I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul if he were the only thing standing between us and Billary Clinton.

 

Sure he has...if you call undermining the USA's reputation and increasing animosity towards us and the number of terrorists around the world by several fold protecting our citizens, not to mention making sure the borders were kept unsecured for six years. Who ever said the democrats were any better than republicans? Not me. Your post doesn't explain what "Islamofascism" is. Imho, democrats are mostly socialists who dream of one day being communists, republicans seem to have taken the other route and combined business with government (with "bipartisan" help of course) It's getting hard to tell where business leaves off and government begins (Govcorp Inc.), and now it's on a global scale with transnational business and other factions of the "international community" (NWO) actually writting the policies and laws our government adopts dispite majority opposition from it's own citizens...example, "immigration reform" which from what I can tell is just a theatrical smoke screen to keep your eyes off what's really going on, Building A North American Community. BTW did you happen to what Britney Spears and Martha Stewart are up to these days, how about the Sopranos...did they make it on Fox's "big story" yet?

NEWSFLASH!

Three Trillion Dollars Are Still Missing From The Pentagon! Still no story at 11:00.

 

Yeah, narrow minded like James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.

What radical extremists those two were in their day and now Ron Paul sounds just like them...heaven help us!

Oh my! Only the worst of the worst radical extermists would show a fondness for such obvious anti-government ideas!

 

I repeat: GWB did/is doing what any good President of the US must do in addressing the attack on our homeland. He must take the fight to them, as they prepare to gather support and infrastructure to carry out their evil intentions against the world. Just wait Poncho, our next president will surely pull us out, and we'll see what happens, and time will judge the actions of GWB, and, I might add, his detractors.

 

Hannity! Is that you? Hey while yer here, explain what this "islamofascism" is and how it works.

 

You need an education.

Islamofascism is the "marriage" of all concerns -- moral, political and YES business -- under the superior religion of the world. That of course, is Islam, and is expressed in the imposition of SHARIA law.

It is Islamic in the sense that Islam is the religious umbrella under which its proponents force all whom they conquer and control. It is fascist in the sense that everything is governed by Islamic law, thus "the state" -- made up of Muslim Clerics or councils, or "Caliphs" if they succeed -- is socialist and [Arab] nationalist for the most part (although how that plays out if/when they "win" in creating a world-wide caliphate is an interesting proposition, as not all Muslims are Arabic...).

Another key ingredient of Islamofascism is something Islam as a whole and Fascism as a philosophy share intimately and passionately -- that is a blind hatred for Israel and all Jews. The Jews are descendents of pigs, or monkeys, the Jews are sub-human, all the worlds problems were caused by the Jews, we are poor because the Jews are rich, and for those "Christians" that follow this inane and unbiblical line of thinking, the Jews are "Christ-killers," ad nauseum, ad infinitum....

The similarities between the words of Adolf Hitler in the 1930's and 40's and the words of Iran's "president" Ahmedinejad today ought to be plenty enough evidence to establish the link -- the marriage -- between radical Islam and Fascism as a political movement.

A failure to discern this connection is either due to (1) extreme ignorance, (2) willful blindness in light of manifest evidence, or (3) agreement with the premises -- if not the practical actions -- of those who espouse them.

JDale

 

Amen and amen!

JDale

 

If you can't prove em wrong attack and smear em. A solid "well reasoned" neoconservative reply. Stop tossing bolonga around and explain correctly what fascism is then maybe you can move on up to this "islamofascism".

Maybe you should read what Mussolini had to say about fascism (educate yer own self). BTW, neoconservatives seem to be real handy at calling others anti semites while at the same time fomenting fear, anxiety and hatred towards semites, this time around it's Arabs, Persians and Muslims instead of Jews.

Fascism is simply the merging of government and business, you can't get around that by making up your own definitions as you go, or by attacking and trying to smear me...whatsa matta fo u? :laugh: Nazism was more right wing than left. Don't let the name (National Socialist Party) fool you. It's another one of those non sequiturs we've all come to love to much to question.

 

Poncho:

This isn't the first time we've crossed swords. You asked someone to explain Islamofascism. I did. Clearly I spoke over your head -- that, or you've been "educated" beyond your intelligence.

The term "neoconservative" which you "throw around" so glibbly is another bussword. It's usually used to refer to Jews -- or their Zionist Christian supporters. If THAT is what you are referring to, then I AM a Neoconservative. I'll stand and fight WITH Israel AGAINST the Islamofascism you deny exists.

You see, one can lead a horse to water (in your case the back end of the horse) but one cannot make him drink. You deny Islamofascism, but should the Lord tarry, you will one day witness them in your streets, right here in North America, demanding your submission -- to Allah.

If you really believe what your shovelling Ponch, you'd better take lessons in Arabic.

JDale

 

Aw, and I've been trying to be nice to you, and here you are still chunkin on me on fathers day no less! But thank you, by being mean and snooty you've proven my point for me. You can't win this arguement using logic, facts and a very very very simple definition.

Government + Business = Fascism. That's all there is to it, there ain't no more. There ain't no such animal as "islamofascism". Are there people who practice Islam that are upset about our militaristic meddling in their internal affairs, using the "strategy of tension" against them for a hundred years or so, being bombed and re bombed again and again having their holy sites being occupied by "infidels" and having puppet regimes forced on them whenever they tried to nationalize their own natural resources or govern themselves? Of course there are! But that doesn't make em "islamofascists".

 

That wasn't being mean Poncherella. ;-) That's okay though... You'll find out all too soon what Islamofascism really is. Unfortunately, all of us will pay for the ignorance of those who deny its existence.

JDale

 

How can you prove islamo/fascism exists when you can't even begin to define fascism correctly?

I understand how hatred of semites is fomented alright, first it starts with the fear that "they're takin over" then comes the anxiety that if we don't do something like bomb them "back to the stone age" and occupy their lands permanently or drive them out of ours "they'll kill us all" and/or ruin our way of life, then after all that comes the raging hatred and the "final solution". The very same "reasoning" that good hard working law abiding Christian German citizens accepted without question. Sorry but I ain't ready to walk down that path, not now, not ever.

 

ne·o·con·serv·a·tism
–noun
moderate political conservatism espoused or advocated by former liberals or socialists.

Gee Poncho, that's certainly not me. I've never been nor ever will be a liberal or socialist.

 

You seem determined to find conspiracies everywhere. That can't be a good outlook on life.