Thread: Curtains For Ron Paul's Web Crusade

Defeat of what? It's not a war. We're sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong and it's robbing the piggybank and killing our own people. We shouldn't have been there in the first place. Yes, Hussein was a dictator but he wasn't a threat to this country. Although I felt sorry for the Iraqis, there are many countries that need to be rescued from dictatorship. But what are we going to do, bring this country to its knees to free everyone in the world. That is not even realistic.

Originally Posted by MW

Tiny wrote:

Look, first of all Hunter was my first choice until I saw that he fully supports Bush's view on the Iraq War.

Immigration and border security are my top priorities. However, with that said, I am one of the few on ALIPAC that supports Hunter's ideas on Iraq. Yes, his plan does include victory, not defeat!

Then you should follow the Goldwater family who is now backing Paul. Recall when Goldwater ran against (I think) L. Johnson with the plan to bomb North Vietnam and get out of there! Victory and bring our troops home there is no need to babysit we babysit enough here!

Now that International law or CFR control, whatever, will not allow us to defeat and get out so people can govern themselves, instead of depending on the USA, we need to back Paul and just stay out of their business! Remember the Iraqis had nothing to do with 911 nor did they ever pose a threat for our Nation!

Tiny wrote:

Defeat of what? It's not a war. We're sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong and it's robbing the piggybank and killing our own people. We shouldn't have been there in the first place. Yes, Hussein was a dictator but he wasn't a threat to this country. Although I felt sorry for the Iraqis, there are many countries that need to be rescued from dictatorship. But what are we going to do, bring this country to its knees to free everyone in the world. That is not even realistic.

Like I said, the WAR is not my priority issue at this time and I'm not going to get into a debate over it with Paul supporters. I've done plenty of that in the past and have come to the conclusion that it's a waste of time for the Paul followers and me. With that said, I will say that I would have absolutely no confidence in Paul as Commander-In-Chief of our armed forces. His non-intervention position would have us stick our heads in the sand while anyone that wants nuclear weapons builds them, buys them, or steals them. There isn't a doubt in my military (retired) mind that a Paul presidency would lessen our national security.

You can respond if you like, however, I won't be goaded into a war debate tonight - too tired.

Not trying to get you into a war debate, just letting you know why I have chosen Paul. We have a difference of opinion on how Paul would handle things, but that's okay. We're all entitled to our opinions.

Originally Posted by MW

Tiny wrote:

Defeat of what? It's not a war. We're sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong and it's robbing the piggybank and killing our own people. We shouldn't have been there in the first place. Yes, Hussein was a dictator but he wasn't a threat to this country. Although I felt sorry for the Iraqis, there are many countries that need to be rescued from dictatorship. But what are we going to do, bring this country to its knees to free everyone in the world. That is not even realistic.

Like I said, the WAR is not my priority issue at this time and I'm not going to get into a debate over it with Paul supporters. I've done plenty of that in the past and have come to the conclusion that it's a waste of time for the Paul followers and me. With that said, I will say that I would have absolutely no confidence in Paul as Commander-In-Chief of our armed forces. His non-intervention position would have us stick our heads in the sand while anyone that wants nuclear weapons builds them, buys them, or steals them. There isn't a doubt in my military (retired) mind that a Paul presidency would lessen our national security.

You can respond if you like, however, I won't be goaded into a war debate tonight - too tired.

Another "no mas" victory for Ron Paul!

With that said, I will say that I would have absolutely no confidence in Paul as Commander-In-Chief of our armed forces. His non-intervention position would have us stick our heads in the sand while anyone that wants nuclear weapons builds them, buys them, or steals them. There isn't a doubt in my military (retired) mind that a Paul presidency would lessen our national security.

How about we intervene in our own borders? The real war is in the US; not fighting for oil revenue in Iraq. We have had over 48,000 in the US killed by illegal criminal aliens since 9/11. But unfortunately our President and Congress say we are broke and don't have enough money to build a fence on the Mexican border. But we sure can borrow trillions from China for every other damn country in the world.

Originally Posted by Dianne

With that said, I will say that I would have absolutely no confidence in Paul as Commander-In-Chief of our armed forces. His non-intervention position would have us stick our heads in the sand while anyone that wants nuclear weapons builds them, buys them, or steals them. There isn't a doubt in my military (retired) mind that a Paul presidency would lessen our national security.

How about we intervene in our own borders? The real war is in the US; not fighting for oil revenue in Iraq. We have had over 48,000 in the US killed by illegal criminal aliens since 9/11. But unfortunately our President and Congress say we are broke and don't have enough money to build a fence on the Mexican border. But we sure can borrow trillions from China for every other damn country in the world.

Well said!!!

Originally Posted by Dianne

With that said, I will say that I would have absolutely no confidence in Paul as Commander-In-Chief of our armed forces. His non-intervention position would have us stick our heads in the sand while anyone that wants nuclear weapons builds them, buys them, or steals them. There isn't a doubt in my military (retired) mind that a Paul presidency would lessen our national security.

How about we intervene in our own borders? The real war is in the US; not fighting for oil revenue in Iraq. We have had over 48,000 in the US killed by illegal criminal aliens since 9/11. But unfortunately our President and Congress say we are broke and don't have enough money to build a fence on the Mexican border. But we sure can borrow trillions from China for every other damn country in the world.

NOt to mention that we are subsidizing practically every other country in the world, by defedning their borders. How long would any of Europes social programs last if they had to spend any real money on their military? They have us over there protecting them!

First let me say my vote for Ron Paul is non transferrable. Ron Paul has a lot of dough and we are always willing to raise more. I am sad that he is chained to the GOP at the moment because it is a dying party. The neo con's have hijacked the GOP and it looks more like the democratic party every day. Ron Paul has more votes so far than Guilani or Thompson or Hunter. I believe he is going to hang in there as long as his supporters want him to. Personally, I have hope he will run Independent. He wo'nt be the "spoiler" because Bloomberg will get the credit for that. The most important reason for Ron Paul to hang for the long haul is because this is not a campaign for Ron Paul Disciples...it is a movement. Ron Paul is planting seeds. We have pledged to keep our groups together and work on electing Ron Paul Disciples on the local and state levels. We will continue to change hearts and minds. There will be a mass exodus from the Republican Party after this election. The Libertarian party is gearing up for a big boom in their party numbers. I have been a republican for a long time. My party has left me standing at the wayside. We need to get off this two party system anyway, it's played out. We will have just one big party soon. The CFR party. It's best to get on the Ron Paul train now, rather than later...I have faith you'll come around.

Originally Posted by theclassics

First let me say my vote for Ron Paul is non transferrable. Ron Paul has a lot of dough and we are always willing to raise more. I am sad that he is chained to the GOP at the moment because it is a dying party. The neo con's have hijacked the GOP and it looks more like the democratic party every day. Ron Paul has more votes so far than Guilani or Thompson or Hunter. I believe he is going to hang in there as long as his supporters want him to. Personally, I have hope he will run Independent. He wo'nt be the "spoiler" because Bloomberg will get the credit for that. The most important reason for Ron Paul to hang for the long haul is because this is not a campaign for Ron Paul Disciples...it is a movement. Ron Paul is planting seeds. We have pledged to keep our groups together and work on electing Ron Paul Disciples on the local and state levels. We will continue to change hearts and minds. There will be a mass exodus from the Republican Party after this election. The Libertarian party is gearing up for a big boom in their party numbers. I have been a republican for a long time. My party has left me standing at the wayside. We need to get off this two party system anyway, it's played out. We will have just one big party soon. The CFR party. It's best to get on the Ron Paul train now, rather than later...I have faith you'll come around.

I was a registered Republican for a short time then registered with the American Independent Party here in California and now I'm registered prefer not to say. If I do register with a party guaranteed, unless Paul gets the nomination, the Republican Party is not the one. I'm looking at the Libertarian Party now and I'm on the verge of registering with them!

http://phillies2008.org/
Professor
George Phillies

Educator...
Author...
Scientist...
Libertarian

Libertarian for President in 2008
Where I Stand

My core message to the American people:

End the war
Restore fiscal sanity
Save your freedoms

Other candidates may make the same promises. Only Libertarian Party candidates mean them:

http://phillies2008.org/phillies_on_immigration
Immigration - I support the Libertarian Party Platform. You cannot have open borders and a large-scale welfare system at the same time. You will go broke. As has happened before in our history, if you have open borders poor country governments will pay people to move here, promising them a better life in the New World. Each time we add a worker to the Social Security system, we enormously increase our (unfunded) national debt, because Social Security is run on pay-as-you-go. Under the present welfare system, a vote for open borders is a vote for higher taxes for all. Someday, the Libertarian message of peace, liberty, and prosperity reach the entire world. All people will then enjoy the freedom and high standard of living we take for granted. In that day, immigration and open borders will be non-issues.

Borders - Americans who quote the Statue of Liberty's message 'Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free' should remember that it was written when most of Europe was run by autocratic monarchies. The huddled masses of Europe now breathe free. George Bush has created many enemies for America. Keeping them from coming here to injure our children and grandchildren must remain a top priority for the foreseeable future.

Foreign Workers - All too often, we hear claims that we must import foreign workers because Americans won't do those jobs. 'Those jobs' in question are hard, physically demanding, outdoor work that require constant, careful attention to detail. Those jobs should be receiving a wage premium, not be barely-minimum-wage sources of employment. There are jobs that Americans won't do, notably in the sciences and engineering; we allow foreigners to come here to study, but then require them to leave. Mr. Bush's foreign guest worker scheme is a corporate welfare deal at the expense of the American worker.