The IMM Smearing Of Ron Paul Begins

www.l4l.org

 

Yeah, and there are Libertarians who don't want to legalize prostitution--they have too many "victimless crimes" in front of their own homes. We are dealing with the majority of a party and we are dealing with what Ron Paul himself favors. How can anyone change Ron Paul? I doubt that he will even go to the GOP convention or support the GOP nominee.

 

Neither will I. So there.

 

You know, I had written out a big, long post answering you back, but started to get so mad about our President, Congress, and even our Governor while writing, I decided to scrap that post.

I'll just say this. I have many friends with whom I disagree politically. You are no different. You seem to have some ideas about Ron Paul and his candidacy that I, and many others here, do not believe are true. We do not believe it because we ourselves are Ron Paul supporters, and we know what we believe now, and what we always have believed.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Libertarian Party. I've never voted for one in my life for any position. I believe in Ron Paul's message, and it hasn't been too many years ago when Republicans in general believed in those same things. Republican beliefs seem to have changed since this President took office and changed what we have always thought a conservative was supposed to be.

Now, like with most errors that creep in over a loing time, we are used to it. That, or we are scared to death of not blowing up every country with whom we disagree. Diplomacy with "unfriendly" nations has always been a touchy thing, yet we have often in our past figured out ways to deal with our enemies without blowing them up. In any event, up until the last 50 years or so, we knew when a war had been won or lost, and when to leave and when to stay.

I see too much indecision with our current President. I hear too much "stay the course...even if it's wrong" (which makes NO SENSE AT ALL...if you drive west when you should be going east, do you keep driving west hoping it will turn into east? )from many, if not most, of the Presidential candidates. America has become the neighborhood bully under this President (although I can't blame just him...we had been heading that for many years prior). You know, one day, the other neighborhood kids will gang up on the bully. I don't want to see that happen. No country is strong enough by itself to take on the entire world. Never has it happened in history. The mighty have always fallen.

Ron Paul has a message of humbleness and meekness, leading by example. I can not understand why so many conservatives, especially religious conservatives, are so beholden to the party leadership that they won't support someone who believes what we supposedly practice in our spiritual life ought to be practiced in our everyday and political lives as well.

I agreed with Dr. Paul when he stood up to Chris Wallace. Should we take our marching orders from Al-Quaeda? NO, we should take them from the Constitution. Dr. Paul should have received a standing ovation and applause from every member of that audience and all of the other candidates, who claim they want to uphold the Constitution. Do they not agree with him?

I just don't understand how people can say he is not pro-life. Calling for an amendment and actually doing something about it are two different things. Here is an example for those of you who believe in saving souls. Is your only goal to save every soul in the world, and slowing nothing short of, when you could stop by the side of the road and save one or two that you pass by?

Why do you only shoot for the grand prize of anit-abortionism in an amendment? It would be so much easier and much more plausible to do something on a state level. Why would you not want to end abortion in 1/3 of the states immediately if you could? That is plausible and closer than we might think. An abortion amendment to the constitution will not pass...period. There are too many hurdles to jump through, plus this country is more liberal on a national basis than on a state-by-state basis.

Dr. Paul has authored numerous bills in Congress to end abortion. He wants to extend the definition of life to include an unborn child. He introduced legislation that would have made it illegal to have an abortion because the child would have been deprived of it's right to life. To me, that is the very essence of what it is to be pro-life. How many of the other candidates can say they have done even half as much as Dr. Paul in trying to stop abortions? To say he is not pro-life is just not honest, and it really makes me sad that people would lie about the man like that. A man who has done more to save the lives of children, including delivering them, than all of us here combined could ever hope to do.

Well, I guess I did write a pretty good post anyway.

Let me just say this.

I am a Republican, I am a conservative, I am pro-life, and I am voting for Ron Paul. I believe he is better suited for the job and has better ideas than any other candidate.

If you don't want to vote for Dr. Paul, then don't. That is your prerogative. Just don't make up accusations and falsehoods against the man because the party leadership is telling you who you should vote for instead.

You're right, cmg, politics is rather ugly. If I were Dr. Paul, I don't think I would even want to lead a country that has so many hateful deceivers in it. God bless him though for doing what he thinks is right, and in the best interests of this country.

 

:thumbs: Well said Bro. Reed, you have put it into perspective and put it in much better words than I ever could.

 

James,

A lot of people, such as cmg, have a hard time differentiating between the political ideology of libertarianism which was a major component of the Reagan coalition(he had lots of them in his administration) and the political party - the Libertarian Party - of which I am a member.

As a libertarian and a Libertarian I am quite willing to work with people of other political parties on issues where they are advocating limited government.

 

1. Well, it seems that friends become enemies over Ron Paul so that must be an indication of how great he is.

2. All that I ever said was that I agreed that it wasn't spammers that ran the numbers up on the video cited but more likely than not members of the Libertarian Party.

3. I have been told by the Ron Paul types that he is a real Republican, etc., etc., etc., but I have also had Ron Paul supporters admit that I was correct when I said that he opposes a constitutional amendment to protect the life of an unborn human being in disagreement with the keystone of the Reagan arch built in 1980 and still standing.

4. Now I am being told that Ron Paul is a Christian even though he does not believe in the death penalty. Yeah, he is a religious leftist.

5. Ron Paul also opposes a constitutional amendment preventing same-sex marriage.

6. The Libertarian Party, which I am waiting for Ron Paul to denounce, favors legalization of drugs and prostitution.

7. The Republican Party has never favored legalization of drugs and prostitution, never favored same-sex marriage, and has stood for a constitutional amendment to protect life since 1980. This does not resemble the Libertarian Party at any time ever.

8. The GOP has not favored Libertarian foreign policy since the isolationist days of the 1930s. Even Barry Goldwater in 1964 called for war in Viet Nam.

9. To me, Libertarians are materialists and modernist and post-modernists.

10. In Indiana, the most Republican state since 1860 and the civil war, we have to deal with Libertarians who never win but often throw the victory to Democrats in close contests. Ron Paul has precious few supporters in Indiana.

 

3) That is not true. The keystones of the Reagan coalition were to cut taxes, reduce the scope of government, and rebuild our military.

4) Being a Christian does not require agreeing with you, cmg, on everything. I reckon you want to write me out of the church as well.

5) Good. So do I.

6) Ron Paul is not going to denounce the political party of which I am a member - the Libertarian Party. Yes, the Libertarian Party supports decriminalization of consensual actions by adults. So do I.

7) So what? Does everyone have to march in lockstep in your Republican Party? George H.W. Bush didn't, Bob Dole didn't, when they were your party's presidential nominee. You want to make your party so narrow, cmg, that the whole party could fit in a phone booth. Go ahead. I think that would be great.

9) Thank you for calling me names, cmg. But I guess I should expect that since you evidently don't consider me to be a brother in Christ.

 

When I said that I thought that Libertarians were materialists, modernists, and post-modernists, Ken, I figured you for the Constitution Party any minute now. As I recall, you change parties and candidates frequently. I mean what do you make of one of the most famous Libertarians, Matt Drudge?

 

I listened to Drudge some when he had a radio show on Sunday nights. I agreed with him some of the time. He really didn't seem to focus on issues much on his radio show. He seemed to want to concentrate on show business personalities.

 

So Ron Paul (allegedly) is against the death penalty, so he is not a Christian? Sorry, I miss the connection here. If Paul is anti-death penalty, that's the least troubling thing about him.

 

And sometimes Drudge talked about how the government was trying to police private life and the internet. I can't believe, Ken, that you think that Libertarians are true Republicans. Think about what you have said about Republicans in that remark of yours. What did we ever do to you?

 

Small (l) libertarians are a vital part of the GOP.

Small (l) libertarians were scattered throughout various positions in the Reagan administration.

You might want to check out www.rlc.org.

 

Good link, Ken :thumbs:

 

If being pro-life in regard to the death penalty makes one not a Christian, I guess in your estimation you count me as a heathen also.

 

You have linked that before, Ken.

And I have said that it is Ron Paul's organization.

This man still runs the Libertarian Party behind the scenes and in Congress. He does caucus with the GOP and he votes with them about as much as McCain, I suppose. I doubt if he can change the GOP and I hope that he cannot.

I do not repudiate Bush as Paul does. Every step Bush ever took was uphill. First from Gore and the Democrats we got the phoney charges about Florida. And then we had the Democrats withdraw their support for the war. Now we have a man like Ron Paul running on the fact that he never favored the war. Ron Paul could caucus with the Democrats and it would not harm the GOP anymore than what he is doing now.

 

1) Not true. The organization as it exists today is the result of the work of Eric Dondero. If you check out his blog you will know that Dondero is now a huge supporter of Rudy Giuliani and deeply despises Ron Paul.

"The organization was expanded by Eric Dondero Rittberg on a national level in Tallahassee, Florida in May of 1990. Other existing LROC affiliates, most notably New Jersey and Virginia, quickly disaffiliated with LROC and joined with the FL RLC to form a coalition. In 1991 LROC went defunct. Dondero Rittberg was elected First National Chairman. A year later former Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Roger MacBride joined the group."

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Liberty_Caucus

2) Baloney. Prove it.

3) This is correct. He supported going into Afghanistan after Osama bin Laden, as did I. He opposed invading Iraq from the start - I wish I could say the same.

 

The proof that Ron Paul is still the darling of the Libertarian Party is all the hits that his video is getting. :laugh:

I think that someone should start a poll to see if Ron Paul is right or left. His supporters say that he is a rightist but I think that he is a leftist because of his permissive stands on social issues. If we look at his past platforms, I imagine that he has changed little. :laugh:

Ron Paul is part of a group of Libertarians in Congress that has their own group and yet are a part of the big-tent GOP. :laugh:

Your own source, Ken, says that Ron Paul is a member of this group formed by this guy who despises him. Maybe they get along better than Baptist Board members, huh? :laugh:

 

1) Well...yeah. Ya think?

2) He is neither. Nor am I. There is more to politics than the left - right spectrum. There are really four different general political philosophies - liberal, conservative, libertarian, and authoritarian.

3) To have any credibility the RLC had to endorse Ron Paul. Here is the list of candidates it endorsed in 2006:

www.republicanliberty.org/candid/c_look.asp?LYear=2006&LPos=SEG&LState=ANY

www.republicanliberty.org/candid/c_look.asp?LYear=2006&LPos=FLS&LState=ANY

www.republicanliberty.org/candid/c_look.asp?LYear=2006&LPos=FLH&LState=ANY

www.republicanliberty.org/candid/c_look.asp?LYear=2006&LPos=SL&LState=ANY

 

1. I am not your enemy. As I said before, we agree on most things. I just think you're being stubborn on this issue, and maybe I am too. Sounds like two Baptists to me.

2. It isn't spammers and it isn't Libertarian Party operatives. It is disillusioned Republicans, Independents, and even Democrats. Sure, there are undoubtedly Libertarians pulling for him, just like these other groups. But, I am not a Libertarian, and I, and others on the BB like me, participate in the online polls just like other normal people do.

3. Ken has addressed this, so I'll just add, abortion wasn't the only platform on which Reagan ran. (Not that it isn't an important issue.)

4. First off, Ron Paul believes the death penalty is an issue that should be left to the states to decide on that level. He does not favor the death penalty on a federal level. Second, I don't see how that affects his being a Christian or not. I have many friends, family, and members of my church who do not believe in the death penalty, and they are just as faithful, if not more so, in their walk with Christ as you and me.

5. The laws already exist to prevent it, for one thing. But, I tend to agree with Dr. Paul that marriage is not something the government should have any say so over. It is really a religious institution. The government recognizes marriages as another excuse to tax us for something. If two men or two women want to have a ceremony and claim to be married, then go ahead. That won't make it a marriage, except in their own minds, provided the government wasn't involved. People already do that today anyway, so there would really be no change. The way ou come off, it sounds as if Dr. Paul favors gay marriage, when he actually just wants the government to stay out of the marriage business. I think the government's sole role in marriage ought to be in the divorce process, for the sake of ending the contract, just like in regular contract disputes.

6. I think the drug issue could better be handled by the states. I don't think all drugs should be illegal just because the government says so. Prostitution, while disgusting and immoral, can continue to be handled on a state level, just like it is now. Again, the states, and the people in them, are better equipped to handle situations like these that actually affect them and their neighbors.

7. Again, actions speak louder than words. Dr. Paul's actions in Cngress speak volumes to me about his beliefs regarding abortion. He is pro-life and has the record to prove it. I don't necessarily agree that all drugs should be legalized, but I think Dr. Paul would leaves types of decisions the states to decide.

8. And Vietnam was a disaster. It was a war that was handled in the same way as this one, except of course for the fact that the South Vietnamese seemd to actually favor the U.S. while Iraqis do not seem to. As Dr. Paul has said, if you're going to go to war, make the declaration and commit the combined resources of the country to win it. This was not done in Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq and we are still seeing the repurcusions of each conflict in those countries. I wish I had the foresight to know Iraq was not threat to us, and we shouldn't have gone in. Now, we have done what we have done, but the Iraqis are positioned to take their country and do with it what they will. If they want freedom, they will take it. If they want another dictator, they will lay down and allow it. Either way, our job is finished and we should come home.

9. I won't begin to think that I know what all libertarians are thinking when they vote.

10. Why do you keep insisting that Indiana is the most Republican state?

As I said, I don't agree with Dr. Paul on every single issue, but I have yet to ever find a candidate who I did.

I think you will find Dr. Paul is really more of a states' rights person than a true "allow total freedom for everything" libertarian. As big a mess as the feds have made of everything since closing their fists around the throats of the states in the 1860's, I think it's time we try the originally intended approach and allow the states to self-govern for a change.