Thread: Ron Pauls Website: On Immigration

Originally Posted by sugarhighwolf

Ron McCain, er, John Paul, whoever. They both talked a lot about guarding the borders and enforcing laws against illegals but when you look at THEIR RECORD AND HOW THEY VOTED it's pretty obvious they are open border/amnesty people.

All you Ron Paul supporters, TALK IS CHEAP AND THAT IS ALL THIS GUY HAS. His voting record is clearly open border/amnesty.

He has no chance of winning. None. Give it up and get behind someone that has a chance.

aint going to happen ... if the choice is the Constitution or a candidate thats a shot in the dark... I'm staying home. These other politicians better start trying to impress me and right now they are doing a VERY POOR JOB

Bachmann is so so and I may vote for her but I refuse to vote for another globalist ... aint going to happen

Ron Paul has a perfect record on voting the Constitution; he votes how the Constitution authorizes him to vote

He said No Amnesty and you dont believe him

but if the other politicians say no amnesty EVERYBODY all of the sudden believes them

Unlike others... Ron Paul doesnt lie

If my choice is Perry or Romney.... I will not even bother voting as will most Ron Paul voters

We will not be lied to again by fake politicians; what they say and what they do are too differant things

I agree AirborneSapper7 that it is imperative to vote in a Constitutionalist.

But to me, not deporting illegals is not according to the Rule of Law. Issuing Green Cards, asterisk or not, to those already here is still an amnesty...Ron Paul does not lie and openly admits he is open borders, pro guest workers, and feels we cannot deport those already here.

But when push comes to shove, I would back Ron Paul because of his position on all the other issues rather than see 4 more years of Obama....

It is still early. I still favor Bachman, but it all depends on who will win the nomination....

Originally Posted by AZres

I agree AirborneSapper7 that it is imperative to vote in a Constitutionalist.

But to me, not deporting illegals is not according to the Rule of Law. Issuing Green Cards, asterisk or not, to those already here is still an amnesty...Ron Paul does not lie and openly admits he is open borders, pro guest workers, and feels we cannot deport those already here.

But when push comes to shove, I would back Ron Paul because of his position on all the other issues rather than see 4 more years of Obama....

It is still early. I still favor Bachman, but it all depends on who will win the nomination....

I'm tell'n ya ... Ron Paul will do as the People wish and what the Constitution says

I will not bend on this issue... and I will DEMAND deportation if they do not deport on their own as Ron Paul Says

They are leaving one way or another with Ron Paul.... the People will demand it

Ron Paul Does not lie and because of his voting record on the constitution NO Special Interest groups even bother to lobby him

He has a perfect .. I'll say that again .. PERFECT record on voting for the Constitution

NO ONE in DC can say that but Ron Paul

I am for Liberty

I am for Sovereignty

and Kick'n Some Globalist ASS for a change

The one thing I do believe at this point is that Ron Paul has, does, and WILL listen to the people...

If we the people demand the law be enforced, they will self deport. Give them 30 days, then round up all others and prosecute to the fullest!

But We have to consider all issues...
Our Constitution
Securing our Borders,
Our Sovereignty
Our Liberties
The National Debt
Repealing ObamaCare
The Second Amendment
Kick'n Some Globalist ASS
and so on....

I like his position on a lot of this. He may be the most viable candidate in the long run. Let's see what happens...

Originally Posted by AZres

The one thing I do believe at this point is that Ron Paul has, does, and WILL listen to the people...

If we the people demand the law be enforced, they will self deport. Give them 30 days, then round up all others and prosecute to the fullest!

But We have to consider all issues...
Our Constitution
Securing our Borders,
Our Sovereignty
Our Liberties
The National Debt
Repealing ObamaCare
The Second Amendment
Kick'n Some Globalist ASS
and so on....

I like his position on a lot of this. He may be the most viable candidate in the long run. Let's see what happens...

I'm for all of the above

I WANT A BIG DOG IN THIS FIGHT (Thats Ron Paul)

and I'm tell'n ya... Kick'n some Globalist ass will feel good in the process

Originally Posted by Anna-Anna

Our founding fathers were libertarian.

NO, they were certainly not. They were nationalists who believed in protectionism and nationalistic border policies. Both are sacreligious to libertarianism. You can not be a protectionist and a libertarian. Its like being a Republican and a socialist. Free trade is one of libertarianism's sacred cows -- one of their prime and fundamental beliefs.

And Ron Paul is first and foremost a libertarian and NOT a Constitutionalist. Why is he so anti-tariff, and pro-free trade when the founders were huge supporters of tariffs, sanctified them in the Constitution, and used them liberally? Paul believes in free trade and open borders, unlike the founders, because he is a libertarian and not a Constitutionalist.

Besides, this belief that the Constitution should have never changed, or be interpreted to fit current realities is insanity. The founders could not even imagine the world of today. Most libertarian policies would be excellent for the USA of 1782. Not so much for 2011. We no longer are a small lightly populated agrarian nation.

Anyway, RP is a globalist. A different one from the ones in DC, but a globalist none the less. He is an AVID believer in free trade and open borders: IMO, the definition of a globalist.

I was fighting a lonely fight against globalist Paul back in 2007-08. Paul supporters ignored the glaring evidence I showed them that Paul was in favor of open borders so much that I said to myself, "I bet these RP people would support him if he flat out said he supported amnesty." Now I am seeing it play out before my eyes.

BearFlagRepublic,

You may have something in saying he is a globalist.

Not in what I see as globalism of today which has an open charge card to achieve their goal of the moment. A top down, do as I say globalist.

He does seem to be a bottom up globalist. One that likes seeing the world come together but of their own accord and on their own sweet time.

I don't fear an amnesty from him. I think we will all be very busy just getting our finances in order when Ron Paul is elected. I think controlling the currency is the necessary first step in restoring control of our country AND our borders. That in itself will put a stop to those top down globalist that have subverted our immigration laws and much of everything else this country once stood for.

Our founding fathers were libertarian.

Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic

NO, they were certainly not. They were nationalists who believed in protectionism and nationalistic border policies. Both are sacreligious to libertarianism. You can not be a protectionist and a libertarian. Its like being a Republican and a socialist. Free trade is one of libertarianism's sacred cows -- one of their prime and fundamental beliefs.

And Ron Paul is first and foremost a libertarian and NOT a Constitutionalist. Why is he so anti-tariff, and pro-free trade when the founders were huge supporters of tariffs, sanctified them in the Constitution, and used them liberally? Paul believes in free trade and open borders, unlike the founders, because he is a libertarian and not a Constitutionalist.

Besides, this belief that the Constitution should have never changed, or be interpreted to fit current realities is insanity. The founders could not even imagine the world of today. Most libertarian policies would be excellent for the USA of 1782. Not so much for 2011. We no longer are a small lightly populated agrarian nation.

Anyway, RP is a globalist. A different one from the ones in DC, but a globalist none the less. He is an AVID believer in free trade and open borders: IMO, the definition of a globalist.

I was fighting a lonely fight against globalist Paul back in 2007-08. Paul supporters ignored the glaring evidence I showed them that Paul was in favor of open borders so much that I said to myself, "I bet these RP people would support him if he flat out said he supported amnesty." Now I am seeing it play out before my eyes.

You are exactly right!

What am I not understanding? Ron Paul is softer on illegal immigration than President Obama! That is why he received a F on illegal immigration! His stand on illegal immigration is in his own words in his book that was published in 2011. It is as clear as crystal!

Thank you so much for standing up for the truth on this anti-illegal immigration forum! Looks like you are once again fighting a lonely fight. Except this time, even more truth about Ron Paul is coming out. The truth about Ron Paul, the man who talks about giving millions and millions of illegal aliens a 'card' of some kind so they can STAY in our country FOREVER, and received a F from numbersUSA is not discussed by many of his supporters who see him as the only savior of America. They appear to be unconcerned about his Libertarian stand on illegal immigration. This is like a bad dream. The same bad dream that many of us experienced when Obama was running for president and his followers were hell bent on getting him elected no matter the end game.

Even though Ron Paul 'appears' to be just a kind old gynecologist, the truth is, he has a history of associating with people who make the left look like the right. That is the big danger of a Ron Paul presidency. The people do not know what they are really getting...Do they care that more lives of the innocent here in the US are stolen from them by illegal aliens, than lost in our military in any given week, in all of the foreign countries combined?

If the Ron Paul supporters waged the same intense internet battle against illegal aliens for crimes against the people in the US as they are waging to get Ron Paul elected, just think of the attention it would draw to the shame of illegal immigration. And think of the lives that would be saved, and all of the children that would not be raped or molested due to all of the media attention about what illegal aliens do in this country.

At least with Obama you knew/know your enemy and who he associated with in his past. With Paul, his history of associations are NEVER discussed by his followers. And when people who are opposed to a Ron Paul Libertarian type presidency try to get the truth about him out there to the public, they are pounced on by angry followers of Paul. It is just like what the Obama followers did to us when we tried to out his associations before he was elected.

Here is an article below by Jeffrey Lord that better describes who Ron Paul REALLY is, and how he came to think how he thinks.

(Remember in 2008, Ron Paul tried to get Adam Kokesh in to the US Congress even though Kokesh was associated with Code Pink) I received this information from a former supporter of Adam Kokesh the man who has associations with Code Pink. As you know, Code Pink is closely associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Code Pink is also associated with Lew Rockwell. Code Pink supported Obama in the last election....

Quoting...Robert Butler, Former Chairman, Libertarian Party of Ohio / Currently District 5, LP of Texas

"[Adam] Kokesh is a Marxist-Anarchist using the language of the liberty movement. Don't be fooled."
- Robert Butler, Former Chairman, Libertarian Party of Ohio / Currently District 5, LP of Texas

"Adam Kokesh admits he's a paid Russian agent, jokes about it. Says America subverts other governments, so he feels justified doing the same (for Russia)."

"We can't let foreign governments and their pawns subvert the Liberty Movement."

- Robert Butler

Most Ron Paul fans keep a close internet watch for anything derogatory written or said about Ron Paul, and when they find something they will go on a rabid belittling attack trying to take away all credibility of any one who would dare to doubt Ron Paul. So expect the same attacks on Jeffrey Lord, the man who wrote this article below, and also on Mark Levin for agreeing with Lord. Notice Code Pink is discussed.

Here is the radio interview. Please listen. There is a link to the full article Jeffrey Lord wrote below.

Jeffrey Lord on Mark Levin Show: Ron Paul is a neo-liberal, not a conservative

Posted by The Right Scoop on Aug 25, 2011

Mark Levin and Jeffrey Lord discuss Lord’s article that reveals how Ron Paul is no conservative, but rather a neo-liberal. They go into quite a bit here, but some of what they talk about is Paul’s secessionist views, how he view the articles of confederation, the danger of leftism in Paul’s philosophy, his view of the ‘non-interventionist’ founding fathers, and more.

It’s a very in-depth interview and I recommend you listen to all of it, but you can also read Jeffrey Lord’s article here titled.... 'Ron Paul is a neo-liberal, not a conservative'
By Jeffrey Lord on 8.23.11
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/2 ... iberal-re/

You can listen to the Mark Levin Show with Jeffrey Lord here ....
http://www.therightscoop.com/jeffrey-lo ... servative/
.
.
.
.

Ron Paul Reportedly Cuts Ties to RT Adam Kokesh http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/39773

Ron Paul never had ties to Koresh but he was interviewed on his program

everyone has an agenda even Mark Levin ... if you check my posting I have his radio podcast Mon - Friday.

I love Mark "The Great One" Levin but not everything he says is good... hell he still praises McCain on Lybia and he is pushing his agenda and politicians as well.. SO IS EVERYONE ELSE

calling Paul a Neo Liberal ... OML .. thats way off in the deep end. Couldnt call him a NEOCON because he is against foreign wars / Entanglements so he had to go to the other extream Neo Liberal to scare the masses .... BOO ... you should be shake'n in your shorts America .. its Ron Paul ... Run in a panic

as far as that goes both parties Republican / Democrats are so intertwined / blurred between both parties and are so screwed up you cant tell the differance between the two and both parties need cleaned out

calling the Republican party a NeoCon and the Democrats a Neo Liberal is slander... it is now a derogitory term and Ron Paul is neither

I am ashamed of the Republican party like most Americans and the firing will continue to clean out the GOP Good Ole Boy Network of Same Ole Same Ole year after year

again I'll ask... where are your hit pieces on the other politicians so I can see your views on them.. we do like to compair and contrast here

or is it only Ron Paul that is the Destructive force in this Nation and should be put on trial for Treason ...

Ron Paul is a neo-liberal

Ron Paul has 30 years in office... so he has 30 years of voting on issues; what part of his voting is being called Neo Liberal in your mind