Politics

Ron Paul 9/11 and Foreign Policy Discussion on Face the Nation Gets Heated

Ron Paul Discusses 9/11 on Face the Nation

Texas Rep. Ron Paul is known to at times have opinions on foreign policy that are out of step with the party he is campaigning to represent in the general election for President. On Sunday’s Face the Nation, Paul got into a tense discussion with CBS host Bob Schieffer in regards to the candidate’s foreign policy beliefs:

As Paul gains more support and is taken seriously as a contender for the Republican nomination for president, his beliefs are examined under a microscope to see how he differs from the other candidates. As Paul grows in popularity, more questions have been asked about his foreign policy positions.

As Schieffer pressed Paul Sunday in regards to past statements on 9/11, the candidate clarified his opinion that flawed U.S. policy “contributed” to the causes that led to the terrorist attacks on. Paul however stopped short of saying the attacks were America’s “fault.”

“To argue the case that they want to do us harm, because we are free and prosperous, I think is a very very dangerous notion because it’s not true,” said Paul.

Pointing to statements made by the Department of Defense and in the 9/11 Commission, Paul said that there is a connection between U.S. policies and what caused the 9/11 attacks, while emphasizing, “that’s a far cry from blaming America.”

The discussion shifted to U.S. policy towards Iran, where Paul believes the U.S. could extend greater diplomatic efforts rather than military action, similar to the way that the U.S. handled the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Paul emphasized that “Iran doesn’t have a bomb, there is no proof,” and that he is fearful the U.S. will “overreact.”

“Mr. Paul, may I interrupt you for a second,” Schieffer said in a harsher tone. “No one has suggested in the U.S. government that we are going to bomb Iran,” but pose very tough sanctions. Paul said he opposes sanctions because they are “the initial steps to war.” As for Schieffer’s claim that no one is suggesting “bombing” Iran, Paul advised the television host to “listen to the debates.”

Before moving on, Paul clarified that he meant Republican candidates are contemplating bombing Iran and that the White House has made the implication that”nothing is off the table.”

When asked if American troops need to be on bases at any place in the world, Paul answered that “a submarine is a very worthwhile weapon,” and confirmed he would bring troops home from all countries and bases, like Japan and South Korea.

“We can’t afford it any longer.”

Comments (439)

1 2 3 ... 7
  • modilly
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:29pm

    This silly argument is so tiring. Unless we kill them all, of course they will hate us. Can you say that they will like us and refuse to retaliate when we kill thousands of them and trample their “holy” places? Let’s learn from our past failures at making them like us by killing them. Jefferson believed in trading with foreigners instead of warring with them. We should try that again as a “new” policy.

    No one but Paul 2012 (well, maybe Johnson)

    Report Post » modilly  
    • robert
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:53pm

      Bob Sniveller got his lectures hammered right back at him.

      Ron Paul’s arguments make sense to a LOT of people…..tens of millions……..or he wouldn’t have so much support.

      He won ‘t be the next pres, and that’s a shame, but he’s certainly got the Washington presstitutes talking to themselves and wringing their bony hands with worry. They’re limp-wristed effeminates who are no more than sub par intellects who so desperately want to be thought of as the intelligensia. It would be a severe understatement to say they”re disgraceful, dimwitted fools

      Report Post »  
    • ramburner
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:59pm

      I LOVE Ron Paul for his Constitution ONLY approach to politics. However, Ron has made more than a few BIG Blunders in the debates. His foreign policy statements MUST be clarified and this should be done with a LOT of press coverage in order for him to be considered a serious contender. In his place the public is swinging support for the plain-talking Herman Cain. While our preference is Ron, we CANNOT take seriously any person who does NOT see Iran as the world’s biggest threat to civilization. Also, Paul must support Israel, we have had enough of lip service from Obama on this issue. We want genuine support talk from any elected President for Israel.

      Report Post »  
    • YoungBloodNews
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:17pm

      @Ram

      Stop being so ignorant, Iran is NOT our biggest problem. Our out of control spending and the masses who love their entitlements ARE. You cant fight a war when YOUR BROKE, OR THE MILITARY IS STRETCHED THIN…. How can you Neocons NOT SEE THIS. Where will the money for more combat come from?????? I could argue China is OUR BIGGEST ENEMY (thought I know thats not true as stated above). You warmongers LOVE YOUR BOOGIE MEN…. BOOOOOOOO! You should be more afraid of the dregs in your community who would rob, rape, and kill you for a meal ;)

      Report Post » YoungBloodNews  
    • Wisdomseeker
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:21pm

      I don‘t know why the tea party people aren’t behind Ron Paul all the way…..he has wanted all of the things that we the TP has asked for. Less govt, les intervention all over the world, to quit spending and taxing. He’s never waivered on the Constitution…..All of Washington is against him like they are against the TP. They don.t want to loose control. Romney will be like ***** and meet in the middle…NO MORE MEETING IN THE MIDDLE with crazies like the ex speaker o de house. Lets go people What the hell are you waiting for ? Washington (George) is dead. Ron Paul 2012. Tea!!!

      Report Post » Wisdomseeker  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:23pm

      Pasul does support Isreal but does so Constitutionally and not in Progressive ways. He would stand by Isreals decisions to protect their country and not try and tell them what their policy should be. If something happened that would be a threat to the U.S., he would go to Congress and if Congress declared war, he would go in strong and not drag his feet. He is very stron on natl defense but sees that our military spends needless money in policing the world.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Itchee Dryback
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:49pm

      Ron Paul is a flake imo. He’s not much different than Denny Kukinick, Ralphy Nader, or if one were honest..he’s only a coat of paint away from the anti war crowd and the OWSers.

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:12pm

      This headline is hilariously dumb.
      I watched that interview, if they think that is “heated” these fools are going to be in for a suprise in a few months. ;)

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:13pm

      Iran is a complete joke and the whole world knows it.

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:21pm

      who here is “pro-war”? and what does “pro-war” mean to you?
      When, to you, is it right for one adult to Initiate force upon another?

      Report Post »  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:29pm

      Ron Paul was only reiterating exactly what comes from the CIA intelligence and what CIA veteran Michael Scheuer writes and speaks about. CIA counter-terrorism expert Michael Scheuer would be Ron Paul’s choice for Secretary of State. Watch the video and ask yourself if you’d rather have Michael Scheuer or Hillary Clinton at the helm.

      Michael Scheuer Foreign Policy Discussion
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQviZPyeXk

      Report Post »  
    • Shasta
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:36pm

      @YoungBloodNews, why is it that you Paulies call anyone who disagrees with Mr. Paul ignorant and/or un-american? If that is your best argument, you have already lost. However I agree with one thing, Iran is not our biggest problem, but if they get their way, they will be,

      Report Post » Shasta  
    • Warrior4Zion
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:44pm

      As a fellow Jew Mr. Schieffer knows the importance of America doing its best to promote the Securtiy of Israel and its interests in the Middle East.

      Ron Paul is an isolationist. He‘s only concerned about America’s interest and in the 21st century we just simply can be restrained by such old fashioned thinking.

      Report Post »  
    • BrotherWill
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:48pm

      Lol. Thomas Jefferson was President during the First Barbary War you morons. Lol. Ron Paul bots. Always good for a laugh.

      Report Post » BrotherWill  
    • cykoaudio
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:00pm

      this is what the blaze calls a “heated” debate?? are they supporting him by reverse psychology..lol…Paul is the ONLY candidate who will stick to the Constitution,bring in the NECESSARY money from the wars-stop babbling foreign policy anti Paul hawks about Iran/Irsrael yada yada..THERE WILL BE NO MILITARY UNLESS WE LET PAUL BRING US OUT OF BANKRUPTCY…got it?we need a prez who will fix the economy or nothing else matters..he’s the only one talking about the REAL problems that have brought our economy down,the Fed(evil institution that Cain was a chair on,the one reason I can’t vote for him,& its a better reason if you know what the fed res. is than not liking Paul cuz of some stubborn view on Iran or Israel,& Paul is zillion times more knowledgeable & experienced on all other matters)..now for those trolls that look for reason to hate Paul by trying to come up w/arguments conveniently the interviewer didn’t ask-stop questioning Paul,every interview he nails w/ perfect logic,undeniable..the reason you guys don’t have doctorate,law degree or journalism degree is why you‘re not qualified to try to debunk Paul’s arguments…I don’t have space to defend every one,but I could,just like Paul does.—it comes to down to us going bankrupt & all other issues stem from there..now who‘s most knwoledgable on why we’re bankrupt & who has best ideas how to fix that??right…Paul does,vote for him..see it’s easy

      Report Post » cykoaudio  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:17pm

      Paul should never sgree to a short segment answering questions that have complex answers.

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:18pm

      @BrotherWill

      Lol, Those wars were out of DEFENSE after being attacked….

      Progressive useful idiots, always good for a laugh and pity….

      @Warrior4Zion

      Americans are American first…..Israel is our friend but not our child. We Americans have helped Israel become a Nation, supported her financially for years, and helped Israel establish a world class defense. What more could you possibly want from America? If Israel is unable to maintain herself, it will be due to her own faults and not because of lack of American support. I’ll go as far to say we have supported to much making many like yourself dependent upon a foreign nation. God of Abraham would not want that…..Be free, not dependent…

      BiBi doesn‘t want anything so I’m unsure why you do…If you want to fight for Zion, no one is stopping you here or discouraging you not to. Just don‘t expect Americans to be forced to send their money or children for Israeli’s cause unless Israel wants to become the 51st state. 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • YoungBloodNews
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:27pm

      @Shasta

      Because most of you ARE IGNORANT, sorry I won’t sugar coat it with sprinkles for you. I dont recall saying you were un-American. But while your responding to me PLEASE state HOW WE WILL PAY FOR ANYMORE WAR????????????????????

      None of you can because you don’t have a viable answer. So mull that over, heck read some history while your at it SO YOUR NOT SO IGNORANT ;) Oooooo Scary Iranians….. Id be more worried about the thugs in your city who won’t hesitate to take everything from YOU when our economy collapses, strict austerity is imposed, or the welfare check just stops. Enjoy being a sheep, Ill have a nice laugh while your being eaten by the wolves.

      Report Post » YoungBloodNews  
    • KICKILLEGALSOUT
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:39pm

      Ron Paul’s #1 source of donations come from the men and women in the service. They are tired of fighting these useless world wars that have no clear objective and end up with nation building and expanding America’s temporary global welfare/warfare empire. WE ARE $15 TRILLION BROKE! What don’t people get about it. Ron Paul is not an isolationist he is a realist and a mind your own business first type of guy and get your own house in order before criticizing others instead of being a hypocrite going around the world telling others what to do and being an unwanted interventionist. If we have problems overseas and it is a danger to this county, then congress can declare war. Other than that get us back home protecting the Mexican border instead of Pakistans border.

      Report Post » KICKILLEGALSOUT  
    • Warrior4Zion
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:45pm

      YoungBloodNews: Remember Gen 12. We must never turn our backs on our Jewish brethern. If we have to sell some extra bonds to raise money so be it. America will be blessed as a result of helping Israel I will assure you and the day we stop supporting Israel America will begin to decline.

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:52pm

      @Warrior4Zion

      You so misuse that verse way out of context and meaning. 

      Just look at the USA since Israel became a State. The USA has declined in prosperity even though we have supported her. 

      Secondly, why don’t all the other Nations that do not support Israel fall in prosperity? 

      Third, the State of Israel has nothing to do with salvation. My blessings come thru Jesus Christ by knowing the Father thru Him. You cannot receive a blessing unless you know the Father. You can only know the Father thru Jesus. Physical Israel has nothing to do with a believers blessing. The Pope used that saying for the crusades….To manipulate. 

      Stop saying if we do not make Israel first we won’t be “blessed”…That is a lie and a lie about God’s Word at that. 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • AB5r
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:54pm

      Please state your point clearly, are you being sarcastic? Get this SIMPLE FACT through your thick skull, MUSLIMS HATE YOU, PERIOD. It doesn’t matter if you do or do not do anything, except that if you do kill them the ones that you have killed will no longer hate you, they will be in Hell with Muhammad. Jefferson knew we had to go to war with them, he was tired of the U.S. government paying massive Jizya taxes to the Muslims of Tripoli so he decided to instead fight them, with weapons, and refuse to continue to pay them the dhimmi tax. Today, we are fools paying billions of dollars in Jizya taxes to the Muslims building up their countries with roads and schools etc. – all of this for people who HATE YOU, BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT MUSLIM, something that will only change by you and your country BECOMING MUSLIM. ANY, EVEN ONE TINY MINUSCULE TEEENY TINY LITTLE BIT OF BLAME THAT IS PLACED ON ANY INFIDEL COUNTRY INCLUDING AMERICA IS IDIOTIC and proves nothing more than the person making that claim is a clueless moron who does not know Islam and wants to try to be a dhimmi to curry favor with the Muslims in the false hope they will stop wanting to kill us, an eternal command of their religion which they cannot ignore. Ron Paul is like the abused wife who after she is beaten hangs her head in shame “knowing” that it was her fault, after all she burned his steak and she knows he doesn’t like his steak burnt.

      Report Post » AB5r  
    • SonOfaCommunist
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:56pm

      I’m thinking of registering as a Republican for the first time for the single purpose of being able to vote for Ron Paul in the primary. Ron Paul is the only one that can make a real difference. The other fools have too many “sticky fingers” and favors to repay!

      Report Post » SonOfaCommunist  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:06pm

      Rep. Paul, it should be noted, has a terrible record on Israel and has called the Israeli government “evil.” In October, the Republican Jewish Coalition barred him from their policy forum due to his libertarian stance against providing foreign aid to Israel. The New Republic reports that GOP Presidential Candidate Ron Paul published a newsletter containing racist and anti-Semitic rhetoric including a claim that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing may have been carried out by the Mossad. Paul claims he doesn’t know who writes his newsletter. This kook cant run his newsletter but he can run America….laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY01Lpg5kqw

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:23pm

      Republicorp what a load of crap!!! Ron Paul is no anti-Semite and yes Israel does make some mistakes. You aren’t saying Israel is perfect and you worship them are you? 

      Are you being blind as George Washington said many would be by favoring nations over other nations? Read his farewell address….

      Please Republicorp tell us why you support Cain who recorded money from Iran by Koch selling them millions in equipment when they weren’t suppose to! Isn’t that anti-Semitic? 

      Republicorp is anti-Semitic!!! 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • smackdown33
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:25pm

      Ron Paul is absolutely correct.

      Report Post »  
    • smackdown33
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:31pm

      Israel is the problem.

      Report Post »  
    • Shasta
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:38pm

      @YoungBloodNews, what is it about Mr. Paul that attracts such vicious, rude, mean spirited and arrogant little pit bulls like you. You can not win the argument, so you regress back to an elementary school mentality, and call people names. Very sad.

      Report Post » Shasta  
    • Shasta
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:44pm

      @YoungBloodNews, your childish behavior, like that of many of the Paulies, reflects poorly on Mr. Paul.

      Report Post » Shasta  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:51pm

      @Shasta

      I think you have called Ron Paul supporters more names then any Ron Paul supporter has every called anyone. You are simply being an antagonist. 

      Anytime you‘d like to debate Ron Paul views verses whatever candidate and views you hold I’m game. I’ve noticed you never really post about views, just ridicule of those supporting a candidate. Let’s put some substance in your posts and debate it out….Let me know…

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • chingachgook
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:05pm

      Radical Islam is the problem, that has not changed since the seventh century. Every where they are, there is terrorism and war. It matters not what we do, we are the infidels to the radical Islamist and that is it. Read the Koran it is all there.

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:27pm

      @AB5r If Iran wants war. Then lets have war. Have Congress pass a Constitutional Declaration of War.

      The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. – George Washington

      I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe [insert the Middle East here]. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. – Thomas Jefferson

      The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature … the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war. – James Madison

      The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and defend against aggression – to preserve freedom and peace. – Ronald Reagan

      Report Post »  
    • jmiller_42
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:27pm

      Blaze,
      Thank you, for once, posting an article that doesn’t try to smear Paul. I appreciate it.

      Newt vs Paul

      http://www.hithimagain.com/2011/11/13/newt-gingrichs-voting-record-cant-compare-to-ron-pauls/

      Report Post » jmiller_42  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:29pm

      @AB5r

      Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few … No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. – Madison

      America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom. – JQ Adams

      Where is it written in the Constitution, in what section or clause is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battle in any war in which the folly or the wickedness of government may engage it? – Daniel Webster

      The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home. – Madison

      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. – Madison

      Each generation should be made to bear the burden of its own wars, instead of carrying them on, at

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:31pm

      @AB5r

      My fear is not a foreign enemy. We have the greatest Military and most prosperous Nation on Earth. My concern is the loss of Liberty and Independence here at home.

      “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.” – Thomas Jefferson

      Hitler said, when announcing the Gestapo to the people, “An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great Nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland.”

      Report Post »  
    • jmiller_42
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:33pm

      I would also like to point something out to those who are discussing the Muslim’s hate for Americans.

      I agree with you that muslims will probably always hate us for no other reason than that we are christians or not muslims. HOWEVER, many studies have shown that, almost exclusively, they only act on that hate when they have been occupied by other countries. They hate us for who we are, but the act on that hate because we don’t leave them alone.

      Think about someone you strongly dislike. Would you be more likely to attack them if they stayed at home, or if they forced their way into your home and forced you to do whatever they told you to do?

      Report Post » jmiller_42  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:35pm

      *Each generation should be made to bear the burden of its own wars, instead of carrying them on, at the expense of other generations. – Madison

      Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad. – Madison

      Report Post »  
    • MrldPatriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 11:39pm

      @ramburner: Thank you for so perfectly putting in words my very thoughts. Ignore “Youngblood” and maybe he will get back out to play with so called “99%ers”.

      Report Post »  
    • HellPhish89
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 4:01am

      uhh, jefferson got so sick of muslim pirates that he sent the US Navy and Marine Corps to kill them.

      Report Post »  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 4:16am

      OKIE FROM MUSKOGEE And he didn‘t lie when he said he didn’t know who wrote **HIS** newsletter? Talk about a line of crap. 30yrs on the government dole and all your leader has to show for it is lip service. But he did become a millionaire in office…funny how that works. Jew hating NeoLibs one and all

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • GETLIFE
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 5:15am

      Ron Paul is whiny, impatient and pedantic. He is impatient with those of us who question his particular brand of “change you can believe in.” If we do not agree with a particular point or method of his, we “obviously don’t get it.” He should lose the whiny impatientness, and stop talking about the rest of the world as if he’s never been there. There are those of us who are well-travelled, and Paul’s assertions about what foreigners think about American military presence overseas is PURE msm.

      Report Post » GETLIFE  
    • en2deep
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 6:39am

      SMACKDOWN33, “Israel is the problem”, really. If those stupid Jews would have just died in the holocaust we would have peace in our day. You sir are a fool.

      Report Post » en2deep  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 8:10am

      Do you realize the UNITED KINGDOM is having this very same argument?

      Here’s a UK radio announcer talking with a listener about Iran/Israel:
      George Galloway talking about war with Iran http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtw5Zy2M6rk

      Report Post »  
    • AB5r
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 8:21am

      colt, the issue is no one who is in favor of, or who has not come out strong against, allowing Islam to continue to spread in the West and in America, has lost their vote in whether we should get involved with them anywhere else. If Muslims are here, then we are involved in their Islamic Jihad, and that includes those trying to destroy Israel. Every person, every country, has no choice, they MUST choose a side, either you are on the side of Islam or you are against Islam. Israel is the only spot of sanity and freedom in the entire region invaded, conquered and subjugated by Islam after it left Arabia when Muhammad died. If the Muslims kill all the Jews in Israel that will only embolden them as they will see that as a holy act for their religion and Muhammad who hated the Jews just like Hitler. At that point they will step up their attacks on us, especially if they are here within our borders.

      Report Post » AB5r  
    • eternalhostility
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 9:06am

      I 100% agree with what you wrote.

      Report Post »  
    • sapper
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 9:47am

      hey modilly………your correct in that the muslims will always hate us, but I’d like you to explain exactly when we trampled their holy places and killed thousands of them without them provoking it? First gulf war we liberated a muslim nation from slaughter and oppression and protected the oil fields that supply most of the civilized world with oil. Maybe you would have like to see Saddam in control of 75% of the worlds oil but I sure didn’t. In Afghanistan we supported the muslims including Osama against soviet aggression. In second war in Iraq we simply finished an ongoing conflict. Frankly the only places I can think of where you might have a legitimate case for your comment is Libya, Viet Nam, Korea, Somalia and Kosovo. All perpetrated by democrat pesidents. Of course Korea is forgivable as Truman really had no choice there but it was still on his watch. None of these had a declaration of war from congress which makes them all technically unconstitutional. Libya, Somalia and Kosovo and Viet nam were all wars which we had no national interest to fight. Kosovo we helped kill christians who were trying to cleans their land of muslim extremists. Libya we helped destabablise and put into power the muslim brotherhood. Trample on their holy places? Like where exactly? Having been in combat for this country I can tell you great emphasis is put on soldiers not to even damage a holy place of any religion unless absolutely necessary.

      Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 9:58am

      @ itchy dryback,

      How can you compare someone who wholeheartedly believes in constitutional government and capitalism to Ralph (small cars are evil and I need to increase American dependancy on foreign oil by suing the pants of GM for their attempt at a small 4 cylinder family car) Nader?

      BTW, that one coat of paint between the OWS crowd and Constitution loving Americans is called capitalism. Both groups see that there is something wrong in this nation and that We the People have been put on the hook for alot of crap that we didn’t agree to or with. But the difference between the groups is that one side is socialist and the other is capitalist. The OWS crowd wants gov‘t to fix the problems that were caused and exacerbated by the gov’t. We want gov‘t to get the hell out of business and let people’s property rights along with the free market rule the economy. That is the thickest coat of paint I’ve ever seen.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • sapper
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 10:04am

      by the way modilly, Thomas Jefferson…..really? If your going to use someone as an example you might want to actaully read up on them or maybe you missed the facts that Jefferson was one of the founding fathers who went to war against England to secure our independence, he founded the West Point Academy and created the marine corps then sent them into Tripoli to put and end to the Barbary Pirates and the extortion payments we paid to them for years. But of course I’m sure your right and historical fact is false and Jefferson was really a dope smoking hippy with a flower behind his ear and a peace sign on his shirt and he never once had anything to do with something even remotely related to military action. Nah, Jefferson was a peace activist. Good grief people, do some studying before posting something so damned stupid.

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 10:26am

      Iraq, Afghanistan and now Iran are a problem because our military industrial complex needs an enemy. After the cold war, which obviously was dramatically overstated, ended their was a period when the US focus on investing in itself rather than building the next stealth thing and blowing up something. Clearly, the companies who make money off of weapons didn’t think they were getting their fair share. Our policy of spending as much of the rest of the world on defense is so off base as to be pitiful.

      Report Post »  
    • UrsaMajor
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 10:41am

      Sensible Person: “You know, I really love Ron Paul’s views on domestic issues, however, his notion that Iran and radical Islamists aren’t a very real threat to our country worries me.”

      Paulbot: “YOU STUPID MORON! Iran is ajoke and tiny little country and there aren’t even enough radicals in the world to be threat to any body. We need to be FRIENDS with these eveil, Fascist, Jew-hating thugs! YOU are are not a real conservative and you are a stupid putz who has NO IDEA what the CTea Party stands for or what the Constitutioin even is! By treating Iran as an enemy you spit on the Declaration of Independence and hate little kids and puppies, you left-wing FAKE consrvatives! Help us Ob-Ron Paulobi! You’re our only hope! In Paul we trust! Paul bless America! BLAARRGGGHHH!!!”

      Report Post »  
    • Quixotic-911
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 11:11am

      Thomas Jefferson lost the very first war after independence to the Barbary pirates of Tripoli. Then we had to pay tribute to the thieving murderers that amounted to our single largest annual budgetary expense. We did however win the second Barbary war. The Muslim world has been our enemy ,without provocation, since the founding of our country. Sorry you just can’t make some people people stop hating no matter how loving you are.

      Report Post »  
    • norway1516
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 11:23am

      I hope they finally look at this nut job and laugh him right back out of the republican party, why give in to the idiocy of liberalism dressed up as a republican? the same guy that walks hand and hand with dennis kucinich is no Reagan Republican.

      Report Post » norway1516  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:16pm

      Jefferson went after those Barbary Muslim Pirates through Constitutional Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Paul, likewise, wrote a constitutional Letter of Marque to go after Bin Laden and his terrorist minions. He co-sponsored a bill to go into Afghanistan to capture those responsible for terrorist attacks, like Al Qaeda. He urged Congress and the federal administration to go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden, when most other officials doubted he was even there. He is in favor of Pilots being armed and ready for defense, and that we should profile and investigate real suspects in an airport, and stop bothering our daughters and grandmothers. He was in Congress when Israel bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear plant in 1981 and was among a very very few that defended Israel’s right to do so. He has said, “Once war is declared, it must be waged according to Just War principles. We should only fight when it’s in our national security interest, and we should no longer do the corrupt United Nation’s bidding by policing the world.” I too believe we should Constitutionally declare War, fight it, defeat our enemies, win it, end it, and bring our troops back home.

      @ABR5 I don’t mind going after the evil Muslims. I believe though, that to protect our federal Constitution, and our Rights and Liberties here at home, we should go after them within our established Rule of Law. It’s that simple.

      @everyone-else Can you actually discuss a topic or issue with facts and credible sources?

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:27pm

      @norway1516 Our current foreign Policy is a Progressive policy. I’ll quote another user here.

      “In 1953, our govt installed a dictator in Iran, Operation Ajax. Why, because the elected leader threatened oil profits. When that dictator was overthrown, we had another dictator Saddam, attack them. Our govt armed both sides in a 10 year war. After Saddam stopped cooperating, we attacked him, imposed sanctions then attacked again. Then they went on to fund and arm another nut, Osama, who they knew was a radical. They then gave $70 billion to another dictator, Mubarak. They sup

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:29pm

      Ronald Reagan spoke in support of Paul’s foreign policy views, stating, “Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”

      Reagan was very confident in our defense against any foreign threat. He joked, “My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you I just signed legislation which outlaws Russia forever. The bombing begins in five minutes.” During this time period it was the Progressives who were most paranoid over an imminent attack or show of power by the Soviet Union. The left’s fear mongering and delusional concerns were soon enough discredited and mocked. They sought a Progressive foreign policy; democracy through military might by whatever means necessary. The liberals and those in the left wing media thought Reagan was stupid for not militarily confronting the threat the Soviets posed. Reagan‘s confidence in our safety and his understanding that the economy mattered most in a Nation’s survival or destruction had the Liberals outraged. Reagan did not adhere to the UN’s philosophy of our Military being used as a sort of Peace Corps around the world. Reagan understood the priorities of our military and wisely sought not to put our troops in unnecessary danger. Reagan was strong in National Defense and yet sought diplomacy.

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:34pm

      Who actually believes that our current foreign policy, managed in these past 40 years by a very liberal Government and progressive Court system, has actually worked and benefited Americans? In these past 40 years has not our Government massively expanded and eroded the Rights and Liberties of its own Citizens in the name of security? In these past 40 years have we not gone into a huge debt because of our spending without limit? What Nation in these past 40 years did we actually go to war with that even posed a real threat to our Nation and homeland?

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:50pm

      I agree with Bush’s actual Conservative foreign policy:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc

      The only benefactors in a new prolonged war will be, mark my words, the Bankers and Contractors. The American people will have been enslaved with unplayable massive debt and their Military spread thin throughout the world. We have enough weapons and submarines to protect us without unnecessarily sending our troops to harms away.

      We should bring our troops home to secure our own borders. These Marxists in Government desire a defenseless US homeland, with no American troops present, and a Military spread thin throughout the world. They desire to only have the big Sister run FEMA, DHS and globalist UN & Company on our soil to “protect” us from our enemies; these Agencies by the way have labeled us TEA party folks as “domestic terrorists”.

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 1:47pm

      Glenn Beck, 4/15/2010: “I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.Did we deserve 9/11? No. But were we minding our business? No. Were we in bed with dictators and abandoned our values and principles? Yes. That causes problems.” 

      How does Glenn Beck not agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy when Glenn said the above which is exactly what Ron Paul said. Out of one side of Glenn‘s mouth comes Ron Paul is wrong on foreign policy and out of the other side of Glenn’s mouth comes the words above as well as: we shouldn’t be the world police, we need to end the wars and bring the troops home. Glenn is contradicting himself. He needs to be called out on it so Glenm might see how silly he sounds. 

      Ron Paul supporters: email into Glenn, Pat, and Stu Glenn‘s own words above and ask him to explain what he meant and how it is different then Ron Paul’s….

      If Glenn has any integrity or honor, he will explain his double speak. 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 2:01pm

      @Republicorp

      What does a Representative have to offer other then being a voice for Liberty and the Constitution? You may want a government that does stuff for you, but true Americans want a government that stands out of the way and allows us to be free. 

      Who would of thought an economic guru would invest in gold and gold mining many years ago would become a millionaire. Is that why Glenn has ads to buy from Goldline everywhere? 

      Good try on the smear job but you failed. You can‘t debate ideas and you can’t do a smear job…You just suck…

      @GetLife

      I’ve been to every continent but one. America is looked at as a conquer for greed, not a friend or liberator.  If you were honest you would admit to such. The Progressive agenda including foreign policy has caused such attitude thru their aggressive action. Ron Paul is very patient as he has held this same voice for years and keeps coming back to speak it for those like you who do not understand well. Your insults show you do not want to change your view but simply diminish Ron Paul’s. Quit throwing a hissy and you might just learn something….

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 2:45pm

      Steve Deace (Christian talk radio host in Iowa) had Tom Woods come on his radio show and make the Christian case for Ron Paul. He answered a number of concerns that the NeoCons would have.

      See here.

      The Christian Case for Ron Paul: Tom Woods on Iowa Talk Radio (Steve Deace Show)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPqG3fiff1g

      Report Post »  
    • louise
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 3:07pm

      Okie thank you for your comments on here. I really appreciate them. There are still more than a few of us who believe that our Founding Fathers knew what they were doing when they penned the Constitution.
      Liberty is worth speaking out about and defending. It goes hand in hand with God because scripture tells us that “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”

      I think a lot of blazers will be going to school the next 12 months for a crash course on Constitutional foreign policy. For some reason, that is the only thing (they say) that is standing in their way from supporting Ron Paul 100%.
      I want to see the real Champion of the Constitution (RP) debate the self-annointed Champion of the Constitution (Obama). Our Nation needs a Constitutional President.

      Ron Paul 2012

      Report Post » louise  
    • junkmaninohio
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 3:36pm

      Gingrich is the answer.

      Report Post »  
    • AB5r
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 4:55pm

      jmiller, don’t buy those lies, that is just some non-Muslim naive Westerner trying to come up with some non-Muslim reason or excuse for what Muslims do. Muslims will ALWAYS make up some pretense for their jihad attacks, you see it every single time they attack Israel, it is ALWAYS, every single time, according to the Muslims, some sort of “response” to some sort of provocation by the evil Israelis. The only way for you to not provoke them is to either kill yourself or become a Muslim, shy of that, in their eyes you are a provocateur deserving of death and whenever or wherever they have the strength and ability they will attack, as a RESPONSE to you being a provocative non-Muslim. If some dimwitted twit in the Western media or academia pulls the “latest” interaction the West or America has had with this or that Muslim group as the “reason” for them attacking us, just ignore that, it is absurd. They follow an entirely different and incompatible world view and system of right and wrong, nothing about it can be related in any way to any concept of right or wrong or religion or morality as followed in the West. Even though we see them as being backwards and pathetic, they have utter contempt for us, solely because they are Muslim and we are not. Islam has no place in the West, Islam out of the West now.

      Report Post » AB5r  
    • theaveng
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 8:14pm

      >>>“His foreign policy statements MUST be clarified ”

      How do you do that when, in the last debate (by CBS), Congressman Paul only received 1 and a half minutes talk time?

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 9:05pm

      @AB5r Thomas Jefferson said, “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe [insert the Middle East here]. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war.”

      The same could be said about the Muslim Nations.

      Report Post »  
    • A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 11:49pm

      To those who think Ron Paul’s foreign policy is not Conservative, you need to know that it is the Republican Party that has abandoned the Constitutional, and even the Conservative, view on foreign policy.

      See here.

      War, Ron Paul, and Conservatism
      http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/war-ron-paul-and-conservatism/

      Report Post »  
    • thepatriotdave
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 12:40am

      “As Paul gains more support…”
      =======================
      Where? On Mars maybe?!

      Report Post » thepatriotdave  
    • thepatriotdave
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 12:42am

      Wisdomseeker
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:21pm
      I don‘t know why the tea party people aren’t behind Ron Paul all the way
      ====================================================
      It’s because half of Ron Paul is flat-out nuts!

      Report Post » thepatriotdave  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 12:53am

      @thepatriotdave In a new Public Policy Poll, 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul bests President Obama 48 to 39 percent among independent voters. The poll also showed Paul as the only Republican candidate leading President Obama among independents.

      http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/11/16/ron-paul-leads-obama-among-independents-new-poll-shows

      GOP outsider Ron Paul gaining traction in Iowa
      news.yahoo.com/gop-outsider-ron-paul-gaining-traction-iowa-232822649.html

      whiteoutpress.com/articles/wach/ron-paul-wins-independent-voters-poll378/

      economicsjunkie.com/ron-paul-head-to-head-with-obama-in-new-poll/

      Report Post »  
    • dr_funk
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 3:15am

      Paulbots, descend!!!

      Report Post »  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 9:59am

      I’m upset at the land grab of MS and LA: Proposed designation of 7,015 acres of land in Mississippi and Louisiana as critical habitat for the Mississippi Gopher Frog. It’s part of United Nations Agenda 21 — LEARN what Agenda 21 is before you vote!

      Congressman Ron Paul, Texas, has introduced H.R. 1146, The American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2001. H.R. 1146 would get the United States completely out of the United Nations.

      SIGN THE PETITION HERE:
      http://www.petitiononline.com/petiti…146/signatures

      Report Post »  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 10:43am

      In Paul’s ideal America, the federal government would be vastly smaller, with only laws and regulations on the books that are specifically authorized by the Constitution. The federal tax code would be abolished, along with the Federal Reserve and five Cabinet departments. Prosperity would eliminate the need for welfare and dependency on Social Security and Medicare. The federal government would leave it to the states to decide many issues, instead of the Federal government.

      Troops would not be sent overseas unless we’re engaged in a war with a clear mission and duly declared by Congress. World War II was the last one that fit that definition. The “war on terror” does not come close. Terror is not a war, he said, it is a tactic, “and they use it as an excuse to take away your liberties,” such as the Patriot Act.

      Is he really a Republican?
      “I think that’s the funniest thing in the world,” he said. “Take a look at the Republican platform. They talk about personal liberty, a balanced budget, limited government, a strong national defense. They want free markets. I’m the best on all of those!”

      “They say I’m not a Republican? I’m closer to the Republican platform than any of the others.”

      Report Post »  
    • thepatriotdave
      Posted on November 24, 2011 at 12:25am

      colt1860
      Posted on November 22, 2011 at 12:53am
      http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/11/16/ron-paul-leads-obama-among-independents-new-poll-shows
      GOP outsider Ron Paul gaining traction in Iowa
      news.yahoo.com/gop-outsider-ron-paul-gaining-traction-iowa-232822649.html
      whiteoutpress.com/articles/wach/ron-paul-wins-independent-voters-poll378/
      economicsjunkie.com/ron-paul-head-to-head-with-obama-in-new-poll/
      ===================================
      Colt…

      I don’t care what some dumb poll says, there is NO WAY that Paul can win the General Election, and you know it!
      He cannot get elected because many voters just like me know that he’s half nuts. End of story!

      Report Post » thepatriotdave  
  • vehoae
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:27pm

    So Ron Paul issues an executive order bringing home all the troops. I can only assume he will dismiss them from the military, along with 10% of the federal white collar workforce. He’ll shut down four or more federal departments. I agree with reducing the ranks of federal employees and the departments. But my concern is soldiers returning home, thrown into the unemployment ranks. And let’s say, oh, two or three or more years go by after that …. our Asian state (you know, Hawaii) is invaded, along with California, Mexico comes in from the south, etc. etc. Russia & China invade the Middle East, Israel is obliterated by whomever, etc. Who is going to fight for the Republic of the United States when all this happens? From what I’ve seen of these X & Y generation rioters/demonstrators in the streets, it darned sure won’t be them. And how about all the X-generation people who came out of school and/or military enthused about socialism and communism? Many of them are those rioters/demonstrators. Will I even be allowed to keep my own weapons by that time? If bHo is re-elected, we can probably kiss what’s left of our constitutional rights goodbye, including the right to bear arms. And what about if the military approves the recent proposal to permit transexual soldiers to cross-dress while on duty? Well, that’s enough. You get the picture.

    Lord, come quickly.

    Report Post »  
    • Radiant.Simplicity
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:33pm

      That’s not what Ron Paul says at all. He believes in a strong national defense and has said so many times. He does not believe we have either the right nor the money to maintain 170 + bases all over the world to defend other countries.

      Report Post »  
    • bullcrapbuster
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:45pm

      All of the soldiers that flooded the market after the second world war did not have the effect on unemployment that the socialists expected. The Government was business friendly so the economy soared. The soldiers that are brought home now can stay in the military so that America can respond quickly should some country want to hire them to kick some butt. No free protection. If they have no moneythen the UN will be their savior.

      Report Post » bullcrapbuster  
    • Heck62
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:46pm

      He did suggest the soldiers would be home spending their money.This guy makes sense in several areas.I‘d rather have him than O’Bomber or Rummny.

      Report Post »  
    • psychokittis
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:56pm

      I do believe that you’ve missed a salient point here. Bringing them home does not mean dismissing them. As things go, we need them at home to defend the borders of the country. They can easily be deployed to bases closer to the borders to accomplish that. The rest of your post made little sense to me, so could you elaborate further and in a more cohesive manner please? You were somewhat disjointed.

      Report Post » psychokittis  
    • stopspendingourmoney
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:05pm

      vehoae,
      You need to learn before ranting on about things you think you know to be the truth about Ron Paul, you have no idea what your talking about, please study this man and his plans for the America, he will bring her back to her glory, in fact, he is the only candidate that is running that can, do you honestly think we can continue down this road of borrowing from other countries like China to sustain our military and government can continue? this makes us more vulnerable than anything? Ron Paul has a plan that can safely get us out of debt in the first 3 years of his presidency this makes us more stronger as a nation. almost everything this man has said has happened, he was right about tarp he was right about the housing market, he has been right on just about everything he has said even when I myself thought he was wrong, I have been watching him for a while and he is the only one that can get us out of this mess we are in, if he does not become pres. God have mercy on us all ….

      Report Post »  
    • KodiakmanSD
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:50pm

      When we went into Iraq and Afghanistan, where did the majority of the troops come from? Our bases in Japan, Korea & Germany? No, we mobilized troops from U.S. soil and sent them over. If that’s how we respond then why not pull everyone back home?

      How many cities have taken hit’s to their economies over the last 20-30 years due to base closings here in the States? How well are our shores protected with fewer bases? Why not bring home all the troops, re-open all those bases and then some? What effect would that have on the economy? How many new long term REAL jobs would be created in support of those bases? Talking about a boost to the economy! Couple this with business friendly policy changes (i.e. get the Government out of the way of business) and you have a winner.

      Report Post »  
    • ChrisDixon
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:54pm

      He wouldn‘t get rid of the military when there’s a border to defend. Unfortunately, establishment Republicans care more about the borders of Iraq than they do the borders of America.

      Do the truly patriotic deed: AMERICA FIRST.

      Report Post »  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:57pm

      This says it well “Ron Paul and Islam”

      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=351761

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:55pm

      Paul’s plan never cuts a penny from our Veterans or National Defense, only in unnecessary militarism around the world. Please, anyone, show me where in his Plan he cuts on National Defense.

      Let’s take a look at lonely Australia. Last time I checked, INDONESIA, right above Australia, had the LARGEST Muslim population on the whole earth. And China, further above, is one of the LARGEST Communist Nations on Earth. The Indian Ocean, right next to Australia, currently has the MOST Muslim Pirates on Earth. North Korea and Russia (on the same hemisphere with Australia), are Communist countries and allied with nearby communist China. And we’re worried that the great USA with her awesome military might will not be able to defend herself?

      @vehoae Quite bluntly, (no disrespect intended), I think your worries are baseless concerns, fringing on fear mongering.

      We should bring our troops home to secure our own borders. These Marxists in Government desire a defenseless US homeland, with no American troops present, and a Military spread thin throughout the world. They desire to only have the big Sister run FEMA, DHS and globalist UN & Company on our soil to “protect” us from our enemies; these Agencies by the way have labeled us TEA party folks as “domestic terrorists”.

      Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 10:33am

      You obviously have never heard of IRR or conscription. If anyone decides to lower the number of military personnel that the US has, it will not be a major game changer. The reason being is that when you sign a military contract you always sign it for 8 years. I spent 5 years on active duty in the Marines and left in Jan 2010 as a Sergeant. They can recall me until Jan 2013 because I am still under contract and I will go back into service to defend this nation in a heartbeat. Also, if we lower the number of actively serving military personnel by shortening the avg. contract length from 4 to 2 or 3 years, we can have the same military personnel on call as we do now and pay alot less for it because every one of them signs an 8 year contract. This simple change would not cause us to have to train more people through boot camp or cost us more than we currently spend. In fact, by shortening the contracts, we could decrease our budget for pay by more than half because the longer a person stays active, the more they earn. So we can have the same or better on demand protection for less money than we currently have fighting 2+wars.

      Also, you need to stop saying the right to own weapons is a constitutional right. While that is technically true, it limits your ability to defend yourself to what a bunch of politicians say you can do. You need to call it a fundamental and inalienable human right that cannot be voted away. Also, read up on posse commitatus.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • RejectFalseIcons
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 2:56pm

      Fact: Between our missile systems, aircraft carriers and rapid transports we can be anywhere in the world and ready to strike from international waters within 96 hours. There are a few bases that should probably remain open (Diego Carcia comes to mind) that facilitate our global reach and allow for things like nonstop flights for B-2s to anywhere in the world.

      However, the bases left over from the cold war can go. Bases in places that hate us can go. These troops should be relocated to our shores, namely the bases that the Clinton Administration closed.

      Spreading Democracy at the end of a gun/bomb/missile or with bribes of blood and treasure is not the way to lead the world to liberty. Liberty is a symptom of american exceptionalism, which is something other countries simply can’t experience until they take their own reins.

      Report Post » RejectFalseIcons  
  • Gold Coin & Economic News
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:19pm

    Sorry, this is exactly why I can’t vote for Ron Paul. Iran is run by kookburgers that want to destroy Israel and they are the biggest sponsor of state terrorism in the world. You don’t sit down and talk with people like that think like that. You cannot come to any compromise with a country that says they have a right to destroy another one simply because of their ethnicity.

    I like Ron Paul and most of what he says, but his foreign policy is simply dangerous.

    Report Post » Gold Coin & Economic News  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:28pm

      you’re right.
      installing the shha in iran in 53 was great foreign policy
      so was arming sadam to fight the iatola
      and training (and arming) the taliban
      etc
      etc

      you obviously have no idea what a dangerous foreign policy is.

      Report Post » Br@dley  
    • Rightallalong
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:31pm

      So whose foreign policy fo you like? Continue the same as we have? Thats what all the candidates want — well thats smart seeing how its bankrupted america and a lot of countries would like to see us destroyed.

      Report Post » Rightallalong  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:32pm

      You seem to have a hard time understanding the obvious. Wake up man. We are broke. Do you think we will be in a better position worldwide if our economy and the dollar fold??? If that happens, we will be at the mercy of the U.N. If the U.N. takes over, we as citizens will have no choice but to start banding together to fight a war right here in the U.S. as they will come for our guns, they already have a treaty in place waiting for the President of our fallen country to sign. Wake up people. If we do not get someone in there that actually believes in Individual Liberty and the Constitution, we will see a lot of people die in our next Revolutionary War. I have looked at all the scenarios and this one is more probable everyday. Worse case scenario?? The entire worlds economy crashes pushing untrust across the globe and ending in nuclear war world wide with Russia and China losing its hold on their people. Think about these scenarios as they are just what I believe could happen.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Andrew72
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:43pm

      Maybe you should read some before you make your comment about Ron Paul’s foreign policy stance.
      Michael Scheuer, who was in charge of the hunt for Bin laden and Al-Qaeda agrees with Ron Paul.
      Colonel Douglas MCGregor ,one of our best tank commanders in the US Army agrees with Ron Paul.
      I agree with Ron Paul, as a Air force veteran and one of the reasons why Ron Paul gets more donations from the military than any one else.

      Report Post »  
    • G.W. Dobbs
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:09pm

      disagree; you say “BOMB” and start WW III/ I say “WAIT”, talk and seek peace. These Progressive Librerals are NOT fair in any discussions. Schiffert tried very hard to embarrass Ron Paul, If we do NOT elect Paul, we will have ANOTHER CFR MEMBER, a different President, with the SAME ONE WORLD GOALS. As for me, I am SICK of ALL of the LIARS; VOTE RON PAUL or accept Socialism..

      Report Post »  
    • mathews2113
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:46pm

      you are so right, i think Ron Paul can straighten us up financially but sux in national defense. he would be a great presidential adviser. But he’s no president.
      what we need is term limits. we need to send a strong message to the government either work for the people or get voted out.
      We need to clean house. CAIN 2012

      Report Post » mathews2113  
    • ChrisDixon
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:55pm

      Saudi Arabia is actually a bigger sponsor of terrorism and most of the 9/11 hijackers came from there. Why aren’t we carpet bombing them?

      Report Post »  
    • THETAXMAN
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:01pm

      I want to know if there is any country, people or population he would go to war to protect outside of the United States. Without France, there would be no United States. Isreal is but a smal Nation with a small population that cannot survive without the support of others (like we were 1776).
      Further, does he believe that Islam has no geopolitical desire to grow or that there is no commandment within Islam (Shuria) to make the world submit.

      Report Post »  
    • wildbill_b
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:10pm

      So your argument is because I can kick your butt, I have the right to tell you what you can or can not do in your own home. Simply because you are weak and pathetic. Is that about it? I guess I missed the memo where Earth became the United Planet of America.

      Report Post »  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:08pm

      Mathews2113……..
      No, Paul is saying the exact opposite about National defense. He even said it at 5:04. We can defend ‘ourselves’ with submarines and all our troops back at home. Our Constitution calls for us to provide for ‘National Defense’ (as in our borders and against aggresion against those borders), not defend everyone else. The subs can help take care of issues outside of our borders.

      Scheiffer deliberately tried to fit too many things into too small a segment. If Paul is guilty of anything, it was agreeing to submit to fitting too many things into too small a segment.

      Report Post »  
    • Gold Coin & Economic News
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:15pm

      @Br@dley, @Rightallalong, @West Coast Patriot, @Andrew72, @wildbill_b

      Wow, wow, wow, this is another reason I (and a lot of other people) have a hard time with Ron Paul, his supporters are rabid dogs like you guys and take others comments completely out of context putting words in my mouth I did not say.

      If Ron Paul even stands a chance of winning, you supporters of him need to stop cannibalizing people that nearly agree with you. Did you read my statement where I said “I like Ron Paul and most of what he says”?

      Lighten up, I’m on your side, I just don’t like his foreign policy. Don’t take it any further than that.

      Report Post » Gold Coin & Economic News  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:43pm

      @Gold Coin

      Sorry but that is just an excuse to distract from you being in error. 

      If you cannot support a candidate or say you have a hard time supporting them because such candidate’s supporters can articulate his views and stand up for that view then what are you looking to support? Those who sit down and do not stand up for such views? 

      You said Ron Paul’s foreign policy is “dangerous” and that is simply untrue. When you say untrue statements, defenders of such views will call you out and correct you. 

      There is nothing dangerous about having a strong DEFENSE, in fact, that is when we are most secure. 

      When DEFENSE becomes OFFENSE we erode the security defense offered by being AGRESSIVE and by AGRESSION causing a reaction in those we are agressing against, either submission or retaliation. 

      If you like Ron great, but understand you aren’t understanding all his views correctly around foreign policy. Intervention is what is dangerous as every action has a reaction. Intervention is aggressive. Defense is non intervention and reactive. Find the truth in that and you’ll support Paul 100%. 

      Enjoy your night! 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • Veritas Libertas
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 11:49pm

      “National Defense” I guess it’s insane to think that means protecting our own borders, or that defending our own borders is somehow more improtant than policing the world. We don’t want other countries telling us what to do, and we sure as hell don’t want their troops staging on our borders. I fully believe that Israel has the right to exist, but the compulsion we have to write ourselves into the Bible and rush toward Armageddon is more insane than my belief in a literal understanding of “National Defense”. In other words, don’t become a self fulfilling prophecy.

      Report Post »  
    • pamela kay
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 3:08am

      I agree with you 100% . I do not agree with his stand on Israel and will not support him for that reason. I also think his foreign policies are dangerous.

      Report Post » pamela kay  
    • louise
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 8:02am

      Pam, I must ask you this question then, “Is the Constitution dangerous?”
      This man is the only one that I am aware of that actually upholds his oath of office. One of his quotes is this…’If we had followed the Constitution all along ( from the beginning) we would not be in this mess…
      I see this whole thing going possibly 2 ways.
      1. We get back to Constitutional rule of Law and Liberty
      2. We dump the Constitution as irrelevant in this day and age and accept the New World Order

      Now let’s look at the big picture. The big picture is the most important picture and is outlined in scripture. All believers know that God will miraculously save Israel. We do not know when this will happen exactly, but we are told the signs to look for. In the meantime before that event takes place, we are here for a reason…..to tell others the Truth of God, and to live our lives as a moral people.
      I do not believe in militarism. I do believe in the “just war”.
      A good ally does not fund both the enemies of Israel AND Israel. That goes for any country. It weakens US and THEM. Israel is more than capable of taking care of business over there.
      Are we being a good ally by funding terrorist nations that hate Israel? Nope.

      Report Post » louise  
    • louise
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 8:14am

      cont’d….
      This is what Ron Paul is saying. Our foreign policy is horrible and all jacked up. Does funding BOTH SIDES make any sense whatsoever? By funding BOTH sides, America is hedging her bets on what is going to happen on the world stage. This is so so dangerous. We need a strong Convicted, honorable man who will not be afraid to say, “Yes I am a Christian. Yes I Believe in His guiding hand. Yes I believe that our founders knew what they were doing when they penned the Constitution.

      For everyone here on the Blaze who are afraid of Ron Paul’s stand on Israel, foreign aid, and overall foreign policy, not only is his stand constitutional, it is also biblical. Search it out.
      None of the other GOP candidates who claim they are for the Tea Party are telling you the truth. They are progressive republicans just mouthing the words you want to hear with no concrete workable plan.

      Ron Paul 2012

      Report Post » louise  
  • West Coast Patriot
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:17pm

    I hope that more people wake up now. The MSM have no choice, because of the rise in polls, but to try and discredit Paul with this type of questioning, but they will not be able to as Paul say’s the truth. He does not waiver and every action he does is done with the Constitution as his base. How can you go wrong when you stick to the Constitution? The establishment hates it because if his ideas are implemented, they will lose their power over the people as Individual Liberty starts to take hold again. Start researching Pauls record. His record is why Paul supporters are so loyal. There has to be some credit for that. All the other candidates are candidates of the week, month or whatever, because people are for them now but switch later. Paul supporters will never leave him.

    Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Shikezi
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:36pm

      How can you go wrong?

      First – Iran attains a nuke and spreads their terrorist agenda across the middle east and then use a nuke on Israel.

      Second – China is allowed to exert their influence on everyone in their region because we are no longer their to keep them in check. This will spell the end of South Korea and others as China will no longer be kept in check.

      Third – Oil skyrockets even more as the middle east is thrown into turmoil. Iran and its terrorists groups spread their influence in the middle east backed by a nuke. Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq, and the rest of the region are now fighting Iran influence. Oil will shoot up as pipelines and so on are hit in the crossfire.

      Fourth – The United States allies and friends around the world are left to fend for themselves against enemies that don’t give a damn about your ideology. Israel falls, Taiwan falls, South Korea falls, Japan falls, Kuwait, and so on.

      Now some of you are naive to believe that this doesn’t affect you. What you fail to understand is that at some point we will be forced to deal with these rogue nations whose only goal is domination of everyone else. I don’t expect mindless bafoons to even think of the future as yall are to focused on the wrong things.

      Yes, I agree we should cut down our “interventions,” but we don’t allow our ability to respond to any threat to be diminished. Call me a “neo-con” all you want, but at least I’m not covering my eyes and pretending nothing

      Report Post » Shikezi  
    • stopspendingourmoney
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:38pm

      Amen!!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:49pm

      I am a Navy vet and I can tell you that we are and always will be the strongest military force in the world even without troops stationed in every corner. We have subs that sit on the ocean floor in places all ofer the world that can strike within 30 minutes anywhere, and we just released the info on the guided jet bomb that can be sent form the U.S. and strike anywhere in the world within one hour!!! That is huge. Do you think Iran will get that technology soon? Heck, they don’t even have the technology to refine their oil into gas, for cryin out loud. Isreal is far more advanced and could take Iran out if we would let it be clear to them that we would stand behind THEIR decision to do so. Look at Isreals history and you will see that they have always been able to hold their own in all the battle from all sides of their country. I have faith in Isreal, do you?

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:40pm

      SHEIKZI What? …If they try to nuke Israel…they know that they will be wiped off the face of the map..Israel has over 300 nukes and don‘t think that they won’t use them.. We have propped up dictators over the whole middle east to have Obama take them down..Now all that is standing in the way is him..But Israel is under our thumb.. do you not believe in the Bible? It declares that all nations rise up against Israel..and Jesus steps in..their eyes will be opened as to Who He really is..At any rate…Jesus will confound all of her enemies and they will be warring aganinst themselves..Their eyes will rot in their sockets. their tongues in their mouths..Read Romans 11 and Zech 12 13 and 14.. I believe the Bible..I believe God ,that He will take care of His own…It is already prophesied what will happen…there will be a remnant one third left. How can we defeat God’s prophesy? Would you want to?

      Report Post »  
  • Mr. Oshawott
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:17pm

    Ron Paul did an excellent performance explaining his ideas concerning foreign policy. I think our horrific foreign policy is the very reason why September 11 occured. If we just bring our troops home and allow the countries, particularly the countries in the Middle East, to have their sovereignty back, they’ll be more friendly towards the U.S. Besides, we’re broke, and we can’t keep letting these unjustifed wars last infinitely, for that is where the military/industrial complex get their ill-gained profits from.

    Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • Berbel73
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:25pm

      Explain what part of our foreign policy lead to 9/11? Name it exactly, I want to know what it is that we have done.

      Report Post »  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:31pm

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver

      osama’s own words.

      or do you really believe it’s beacuse they hate our freedom (which is a completely obtuse statement)?

      Report Post » Br@dley  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:42pm

      Berbel, If China looked at us and said the OWS protest shows that we are treating them unfair by pepper spraying them and arresting them and decided to come over here to help the protesters with arms and they rose up against our military and pushed our troops back and then decided to help them more by putting in a Chinese military base somewhere here to continue to help them, what would you think? Would you blame the people of China or their leaders foreign policy? Would you not want to attack them? This is what we do. War should always be a last resort, and if our country is at threat of attack, Congress declares a war and we go in and win it quickly and decisively. All Paul is saying is that the media and our Progressive politicians are saying they hate our freedom, but all the reports and the words of our attakers say that it is because of our occupation in their countries that they fight against us. We need to be responsible for our actions under the Constitution and do things according to the rule of law. The Constitution is the answer, it always has been.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:05pm

      Br@dley, the letter was intended for western consumption, for ignoramuses like you to gobble it up hook, line and sinker. OBL had there some nice kool-aid for the liberal mind set.

      If you want the real score, you need to read the actual Al Qaeda materials in original (some translations have been posted on MEMRI). The you‘d know it’s about jihad and the goal is khilafah worldwide.

      You also don’t recognize another real intent of the letter, because it is not spelled out directly. It’s the invitation to Islam. The failure to submit to it in pre-set time (1 year) means that you are a part of dar-al-harb (the realm of war) and thus subject to attacks without further notice. Granted, he did some preemptive attacking already, who is to squabble with the will of Allah?

      Report Post » Twobyfour  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:14pm

      OR
      that was his motivation.
      god you people are freaking morons. no wonder the country is such dire straits.

      Report Post » Br@dley  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:15pm

      the simplest explaination is usaully the correct one.

      Report Post » Br@dley  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:29pm

      Exactly “what did WE do?” I’ve answered it several times, so here we go again

      History of US in Iran http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk_BO40FElo

      Report Post »  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:38pm

      Usaully correct you say? And then calling people morons.. I see an oxymoron right there.

      That is the occam’s razor that is applicable to hard sci data. In the realm of human social interaction the scientific method is not really applicable. You need to read tons of stuff and look at not only what people say but also what people do, and what is their main ideological/political source, to discern a pattern. Dissimulation is one of the key elements of warfare, stressed out in koran. You need to keep that in mind when parsing the statements of Islamists.

      Report Post » Twobyfour  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:45pm

      you’re right, i’m stupid because i am a horrible typist. i can, however, articulate a logical thought. i cannot say the same for you sir.

      Report Post » Br@dley  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:51pm

      Ah right. Just accusing me of a lack of logical thinking does the trick. Or calling others morons. You don’t need any actual evidence for it. Neat.

      Point out what s illogical in my replies and why.

      Report Post » Twobyfour  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:19pm

      occams’s razor:when selecting from opposing theories, it is reccomended to select the one with the FEWEST assumptions. ie- he said what he meant.

      if your rant was an attempt to belittle my evidence, it was completely counter-intuitive.

      good day.

      Report Post » Br@dley  
  • TriforcePlayer
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:15pm

    Thank God this man will never be President

    Report Post » TriforcePlayer  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:25pm

      I would not say that if I were you. I think that people are waking up everywhere to the Progressive agenda and are starting to look to the Constitution again. Why don’t you pick up a copy and read it? Read the Federalist Papers, I know they are long and can be somewhat boring, but it is a wealth of information on the true intent of our Founding Fathers and their wisdom in creating a government that is controlled by the people. That is what we need again before all liberty is gone forever.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Br@dley
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:34pm

      i bet you voted for bush huh?

      hahaha, sad….

      Report Post » Br@dley  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:19pm

      I can tell you, mif he were President the liberals would go crazy. I think that’s enough reason for me to vote for Paul.

      He is right about more things than he is wrong.

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
  • tzion
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:10pm

    What I take away from this is that Ron Paul believes that even if an action is both justified and righteous, if it ****** someone off then we shouldn’t do it. Ron Paul is more of an appeaser than Obama is. Appeasement didn’t work on Hitler, it hasn‘t worked on Israel’s enemies, and it will never work on Iran. Appeasement is the most dangerous form of foreign policy in the history of the world followed closely by indifference. Paul seems to follow both ideologies.

    Report Post »  
    • NoNannyState4me
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:18pm

      LOL at the neocon rant. Iran hasn’t 1/1000th of the influence or power of the Nazi’s.

      Report Post » NoNannyState4me  
    • Radiant.Simplicity
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:24pm

      Again sorry you comparison to WW2 holds zero water. Germany in WW2 had one of the largest most well equipped armies in the history of man. Germany was invading country’s left and right. Iran is a complete joke militarily and has no ability whats so ever to project power.
      Amount Iran spends on defense: 9,174,000,000
      Amount the US spends on defense: 698,105,000,000

      I am sure we should be shaking in our boots!

      Report Post »  
    • Twobyfour
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:23pm

      Radiant. say Iran will sink several cargo ships in the the narrows of Persian Gulf. They’ll have the worlds economy on its knees.

      The actual spending is not as relevant. It is how the spending is used. Iran is hell bent to use the funding in asymmetrical type of warfare. They have to get just a few nukes and figure out the delivery system. In the first case, they may be successful to hold the other Gulf oil producing countries a hostage.

      In the second, they’d need just a handful of submarine fired nukes to explode above CONUS to create EMP that would set the country back 200 years. Or they can use the cargo container delivery–it’s extremely cheap and there is very little chance of accidental discovery, if they disassemble the device and hide it within other types of goods. The actual nuclear material component can be smuggled in through the Mexican border courtesy Zetas.

      Some materials from IRG have been leaked out of Iran and they entertain scenarios of asymmetrical type of warfare.

      You should also read something on Mahdist ideology and what they are after. They don’t need, for achieving their feverish goals, a large scale military production in the bulk of the US, Russia or China. They just want to “stir the pot”, and let the nations with nuclear capacity to finish the job.

      Report Post » Twobyfour  
  • Radiant.Simplicity
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:58pm

    We have seen the neo-con policy of intervention over the last 50+ years and it’s been consistently a failer and without merit. Lets see Korea, what did we really accomplish there and just how long are we going to station 25,000 troops there? Forever? Vietnam, the utter nonsense of the domino effect lol … 58,000 dead for what? Tell me that’s justified! Panama, what a joke what did we accomplish there, Haiti it’s just as bad or worse than when we arrived. The Gulf war well we were back there 10 years later!!! Iraq/ Afghanistan hardly a success I guarantee you 10-20 years from now it will be just like we were never there… just ask the Soviets Can you justify the trillions and trillions spent on what in the end will be a complete waste of time, Ron Paul is 100% correct!

    Report Post »  
    • shorthorn
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:28pm

      1. 9/11 occurred because Bin Laden was unhappy that the Saudis chose the US over him to protect themselves from Saddam. Additionally, the FBI was at fault because they knew about many aspects of the plot, but failed to act.
      2. Vietnam was won on the battlefield, but we withdrew because the media spun the war as a loss. Congress agreed to fund the South Vietnamese military, but reneged on the agreement when we pulled out. As a result, there was a slaughter of innocent people who supported us. By the way, Lyndon Johnson, a Democrat, involved us heavily in that war with the Gulf of Tonken resolution.
      3. Harry S. Truman, also a Democrat, involved us in the Korean War, then failed to win it.
      4. The second battle with Iraq occurred because George Bush, a Republican, did not want to remove Saddam. At the time, he was told it was a mistake. It also occurred because Saddam violated the terms of our cease-fire with him.

      Have you ever read a history book? Ever????

      Report Post » shorthorn  
    • Radiant.Simplicity
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:38pm

      Yes you just made my point in every sentence thanks! Yes I can and have read many history books difference between you and me is I can look at history and come to the common sense conclusion that they were a total waste of time and loss of life.

      Report Post »  
  • Jaayy
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:53pm

    Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz agrees with Ron Paul:

    “There are a lot of things that are different now, and one that has gone by almost unnoticed–but it’s huge–is that by complete mutual agreement between the U.S. and the Saudi government we can now remove almost all of our forces from Saudi Arabia. Their presence there over the last 12 years has been a source of enormous difficulty for a friendly government. It’s been a huge recruiting device for al Qaeda. In fact if you look at bin Laden, one of his principle grievances was the presence of so-called crusader forces on the holy land, Mecca and Medina.”

    Source: Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Sam Tannenhaus, Vanity Fair (09 May 2003)

    Report Post »  
  • jakartaman
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:52pm

    Unfortunately – freedom is not free
    Ask a world war II vet.
    We did not start that war – we did not want to be involved in that war.
    If we did not get Involved the world would be speaking German under Nazism.
    Sometimes you have to fight – or die.
    Israel is facing the same situation – They do not want to bomb Iran – but if they do not their survival would be highly suspect. – What would you do – write a nasty letter to the UN!!

    Report Post »  
    • Radiant.Simplicity
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:01pm

      Sorry WW2 has absolutely nothing in common with all the interventions and misadventures over the last 50 years. This not a good analogy at all.

      Report Post »  
    • NoNannyState4me
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:15pm

      Well this is NOT anything we need to fight or die on, Mr WW2. What is it exactly that will kill the rest of the world off if we don’t intervene. Don’t say Islam, because every war we’ve caused in the last 20 years only makes them more radical and angry at us for existing. Out of sight out of mind and we’d be in much better shape.

      Report Post » NoNannyState4me  
    • jakartaman
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:32pm

      Oil – you two numb nuts.
      They would use the nukes to hold the region and world hostage to oil prices or maybe give a couple to the terrorist. Read the islamic antichrist as see what islam is all about.
      Not only will you not be able to afford gas for you hybrid pris. but the cost of everything will skyrocket.
      You think the economy is bad now – can you say DEPRESSION

      Report Post »  
    • KTsayz
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:58pm

      Jakartaman, the USA has more oil than Saudi Arabia. We also have more natural gas than SA AND we have coal. America was blessed with so much natural energy we don’t need the Middle East. I wouldn’t be surprised if part of the reason we take from the ME is so they will be depleted first. Face it, once their oil is gone, so are they.

      Report Post »  
    • SpinMD
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:12pm

      @jakartaman….Take Israel off their leash. Your analogy, strictly militarily speaking, is a total farce. Iran is nowhere close to being equal to Israel. Not quite analogous to Poland attacking Germany pre WWII but more along those lines than comparing Iran’s current strength to Germany. Thanks for trying to scare me though.

      Report Post » SpinMD  
    • SpinMD
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:35pm

      Once again, KT sayz it well. I have been saying that for years. Send the middle east a bunch of worthless dollars which have no true value since 1971 and when we have sucked them dry, we devalue the dollar and leave them hanging. Then we tap our resources and when they come knocking to buy from us, we say sure, but we only take gold or silver, keep the dollars. My thought is Russia, China and the middle east are waking up to this and hence the race to the currency bottom and an exit from the dollar being the world reserve currency. Look up IMF SDR’s. The middle eastern regimes also see the writing on the wall and are looking for alternate sources of energy and income. How will these tribal nations move into the 21st century? Some are trying to achieve nuclear power to build a manufacturing base upon as they have no real resources other than depleting oil reserves and sand. Tourism? We say they hold us hostage with oil supplies. What if the opposite is true? What if we keep them fat and lazy with all these dollars which are about to turn to dust? It is almost if we are the ant eating up at the grasshopper’s house for a change. The middle eastern leaders live in the lap of luxury without significant preparation for the future partly because we won’t let them and partly because they are shortsighted. However, we save our resources, while consuming theirs, waiting for the self fulfilling economic winter coming soon. Or am I giving our leaders too much credit?

      Report Post » SpinMD  
  • discus02
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:49pm

    We have foreign enemies be cause we tend to stick our noses into their internal affairs. We don’t like it when they do it but it is ok if we do it. Stay the hell out of other nations problems and fix our country!

    Report Post »  
  • Bakko Bomma
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:44pm

    Ron Paul 2012

    Report Post » Bakko Bomma  
    • YepImaConservative
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:26pm

      >BAKKO B0MMA

      You called QP a “Neocon moron.”

      So you wouldn’t mind me calling you a Thrifty-Liberal mental midget… right?

      I know I’m writing for Mr. QP here… but I’m sure he would agree.

      Report Post » YepImaConservative  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 4:31am

      NeoLibs

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
  • NOBALONEY
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:43pm

    Hindsight is 20/20. Schieffer questioning was hostilie and as with the rest of MSM. Why doesn’t Obama get these kinds of drillings?

    Report Post » NOBALONEY  
    • Jaayy
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:52pm

      “Bob Schieffer promised Ron 20 minutes on Face the Nation, but cut him off after 10, because he was demolishing that establishment shill. Catch Schieffer’s smirk. Also, there was a loud buzzing from Ron’s earpiece during the entire interview. Deliberate? Who knows, but the flaw had been pointed out again and again 15 minutes before airtime.” (Source: L. Rockwell)

      Report Post »  
  • bullcrapbuster
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:43pm

    I agree in principle with everything Ron Said. Look After America and quit messing in op’s business. It is very easy to monotor the world from home. We all know what happens when people stick their noses where they do not belong. Screw the new world order.

    Report Post » bullcrapbuster  
  • ashestoashes
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:41pm

    Why idoes no one mess with China? They don’t go to war with anyone and they have replaced us as being the most powerful nation in the World.. We are bankrupted.

    Report Post »  
  • junior1971
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:40pm

    Some of you actually believe that it is written in the constitution or even in the federalist papers that the U.S is supposed to plant hundreds of military bases all over the world. You are the insane one if think it is justifiable to do so. When you are the top dog, you are by default going to look somewhat responsible for retaliation, especially if you invade or occupy another nation. Sounds like most of you are looking forward to the nwo. Kiss your sovereignty and individuality good bye.

    Report Post » junior1971  
  • qpwillie
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:39pm

    Of course Paul didn’t say 9/11 was America’s fault. He just said it happened as a result of things America did. The difference is …………. uh ……… mmmmm ….. Well I‘m sure I’ll think of a difference sooner or later.

    Report Post » qpwillie  
    • Bakko Bomma
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:46pm

      Neocon moron.

      Report Post » Bakko Bomma  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:50pm

      @QPWillie

      America did not cause 9/11…He isn’t a truther…..

      American action was part of the equation that led to 9/11 yes. American action wasn’t the whole equation but part of the equation. 

      Quit being a hater….You know he is right….

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:52pm

      QPwillie, what you are doing, what everyone is doing by mistaking what Dr. Paul is saying, is called EQUIVOCATION. It’s a BS way of rationalizing, which is no display of logic whatsoever. What you are doing is to say, e.g. that a picture of yourself, is the exact same thing as YOU; that there is no difference at all when there obviously is, one is a representation produced through the capturing of light on photo sensitive paper, while the other, you, is a wonderful example of h.omo-non-sapiens.

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:00pm

      LOL!
      Oh Okie, I guess I shouldn’t enjoy getting you riled so much but damn man, you just make it so easy … and so much fun.

      We all know that Ron Paul is perfect and his words should carry more weight than the Bible so you can calm down now.

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:09pm

      QP, You Progressive you.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:11pm

      Conservatarian,
      9/11 happened because a bunch of idiots believe their god wants them to kill us. That’s all.

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:18pm

      West Coast Patriot,
      I’m one of them there status quo, progressive, neocons. But then so is everybody else whose name doesn’t happen to be Ron Paul.

      Heck, I don‘t even listen to Alex Jones every day so you know I’m a lost cause.

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:19pm

      Amazing QPWillie, that’s all the explanation we need, why weren’t you heading up the 9/11 commission, the CIA, NSA, FBI and various military agencies so they could’ve saved hundreds of thousands of pages written on the various explanations of blow-back. We don’t need any of them, just the department of QPWillie.

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:33pm

      A Conservatarian,
      “just the department of QPWillie”

      ..And you’d have a problem with that?

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • sambachico
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:41pm

      @ QPWILLIE

      “9/11 happened because a bunch of idiots believe their god wants them to kill us. That’s all.”

      Go to your local library and pick up a few books. Namely the 9/11 commission report. Then go to http://www.non-intervention.com – written by the former CIA analyst who headed up the Bin Laden Unit. Then pick up another book called the bible. If America is to be a christian nation as I understand it as most ‘conservatives’ claim- Jesus taught and exemplified love, compassion, peace, forgiveness, kindness, gentleness, goodness and meekness. I don’t see any of these fruits in our governance today. Thus yes, all the other candidates not advocating for these principles listed above are nearly all the same.

      We have turned our backs on God as a nation and placed our trust in humanity. If there is any single group that should abhor the excesses and abuses of the state, it is those who claim to follow Jesus – in my opinion.

      Ron Paul is not a God, is not a saint, but is a sinner and a servant of the lord But Ron Paul has done one thing right his entire career – to stand for principle. He is also a man who has led a Christian walk his life, with his fruits being first a wonderful family that loves him, a wife who had stood by him for 50 years, and a career that has been structured around liberty and the preservation of life delivering children into this world. Find another candidate with real credibility in the areas listed above and i’ll change my vote.

      Report Post » sambachico  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:02pm

      QP, I just call it like I see it. I am starting to have faith that Paul will get the nomination and we will not have to write him in.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:06pm

      sambachico,

      Of course we’ll all support whichever candidate we choose to. I just hope your misguided overzealous loyalty doesn’t cause you to do things that will help 0bama to get elected because I would have to pay for YOUR lack of knowledge.

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:19pm

      @West Coast Patriot

      Why would you write in somebody who doesn’t get the nomination? Why not just go ahead and vote for 0bama. Don’t give me that dookey about “principles”. There’s nothing noble or “principled” about doing one thing when you KNOW the result will be something else. In fact, it is on the edge of being dishonest.

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:30pm

      QP, I see it this way, I will vote on my principles to vote for liberty and the Constitution. I will never vote for a Progressive. If you can vote against Constitutional principles and there are many of you that do, then you will have noone to blame but yourself. I know that most Paul supporters are ready to do this, and now that you know, you may want to research Pauls real ideas and record and stop listening to the Progressive media, including Fox.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:44pm

      “Willie”

      Lol you make no one “riled” up at all. You are just the jack ass everyone laughs at and has pity for…You are the jester….You not realizing it is even more saddening….

      Ron Paul is not perfect….Ron Paul’s views are Constitutional aligned though. 

      You are just a hater. You are just upset we expose your views for the progressive views they are…. 

      Anytime you‘d like to debate Ron Paul’s views verses any other candidates views to determine who is more Constitutional, we can. Your continuing to decline such a debate speaks volumes, Willie….

      Have a good night!!! 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • qpwillie
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:44pm

      West Coast Patriot
      When you write in a vote for somebody knowing it is helping somebody else get elected, YOU ARE VOTING FOR A PROGRESSIVE. And you are not voting for your principles, you’re not voting for liberty and you are not voting for the constitution. You are voting for 0bama. I don‘t know what’s missing in your brain that you can’t comprehend that.

      Report Post » qpwillie  
    • Buck Shane
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:15pm

      @ qpwillie
      Do you not understand Libertarianism?
      Your criticisms of Ron Paul seem to demonstrate that you can’t.
      His supporters on this site will explain to everybody that they are morons and call everybody neocons.
      They do their candidate damage with their constant attacks on people who could eventually see Paul’s view of things.
      The democrats have two major strategies to paint republican candidates. They tell us they are stupid, and they tell us they are racist.
      Ron Paul is being painted as a silly little man. They have no other choice. They cannot argue against his positions on most things so they need to paint him as irrelevant. That is what this interview was about. They are succeeding. You seem to be an example of their work.
      The question should be, “What is government for?” We need a government to protect you from me, me from you, and us from everybody else. What else do we need a government for? I don’t need to be ruled, do you?
      In this election we are not going to be able to fix all the problems with our government, but Paul, Bachmann, or Cain would be a step in the right direction.
      I am treating you like you are a serious person.
      If you are a moron, please don’t respond – life’s too short for me to bother with dopes.

      Report Post » Buck Shane  
    • sambachico
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:55pm

      @QPWILLIE

      QPWILLIE WORLDVIEW – If you don‘t vote along collective ’establishment’ Republican party lines, you are no different than a progressive and will help get Obama elected. It‘s simply a black and white world in QPWILLIE’s view. Obama is just the worst marxist we’ve had yet, but somehow QP rationalizes that some Republican Hacks like Gingrich who failed on a Contract w/ America, and Cain who sees the fed as not any part of the economic problem will absolutely be ‘better’ than Obama.

      If you can‘t see that the Federal Reserve isn’t the root cause crony capitalism, or the root cause of government expansion, please hold off on lecturing others on what to do. To be honest, Ron Paul is the only candidate who gives me hope for the future when looking at my three children living in this country. A phony warmonger like Rick Santorum will just have my kids dealing w/ more taxation, debt, warfare, status quo social security theft, and national bankruptcy. Santorum can preach is family values like GWBush, Romney can continue denying he is a progressive, Bachmann can continue to act like she’s relevant on social issues, Cain can continue lecturing us that tax increases w/ 999 are the answer because it worked in the 1992 version of Sim City. These guys are a joke.

      With Paul you know what you get. Monetary reform, maximization of states rights, constitutional obedience, the veto pen, no nation building, cut the budget, no UN, no agenda 21, freedom.

      Report Post » sambachico  
  • KidCharlemagne
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:34pm

    Point #1: The Soviet Union went bankrupt trying to police the world (http://www.usdebtclock.org)

    Point #2: Japan, China, India, and South Korea (the largest trading partners of the U.S. outside of North America) are the largest customers for Iran’s crude oil. Two of those countries on this list already have PLENTY of nuclear weapons and if you suddenly cut off access to their significant sources of crude oil, then don‘t you think they’ll get a little perturbed about it??

    Point #3: how are you gonna’ forcefully prevent them from getting a weapon without setting off a sudden and steep gas price shockwave throughout the entire U.S. economy? Already, it doesn’t take but a 0.1% drop in the unemployment rate these days to spur those hedge funds into buying up crude oil contracts like crazy, so how many crude oil contracts would begin to be bought (driving the price up of gas up) at the prospect of a severe restriction of the world’s supply of crude oil?

    Point #4: Ahmadinejad loves to rattle chains around the world so that he can get the price of crude oil to go higher because he knows that whenever the war drums start banging, then the price of crude oil will rise and he laughs all the way to the bank afterward.

    Point #5: why in God’s name would you want to make Ahmadinejad a wealthier man that he already is by driving the price of crude oil upward?

    Point #6: I don’t want to pay $10 a gallon for gas….

    Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:51pm

      @KID Good Points.

      Report Post »  
    • Buck Shane
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:01pm

      @ KidCharlemagne
      1. This is incorrect
      2. It make no difference where the oil comes from with the exception of transportation costs. Oil was being shipped to Japan from Alaska. There is a large pot of oil and the users draw from it. When one source disappears, supply and demand causes the prices to rise, but no one cares where the oil comes from and no one cares who they sell it to.
      3. It can be done in concert with the Saudis, with little effect on the world, very few or no casualties, and eliminate the Iranian Nuclear Weapon Program.
      4. Correct.
      5. He is a puppet. He works for the Mullahs.
      6. Neither do I.

      Report Post » Buck Shane  
    • KidCharlemagne
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:39pm

      Buck Shane
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:01pm

      @ KidCharlemagne
      1. This is incorrect
      (you’d better check again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_the_United_States)

      2. supply and demand causes the prices to rise,
      (Correct:

      “If so, the spike in Crude Oil prices could be massive depending on how long Iran is able to defend and engage in conflict with its adversaries at the Strait of Homruz.

      The last time a conflict erupted in the region was the Iraq-Kuwait war in 1990 which resulted in Crude Oil prices almost doubling in no time on fears of reduced output. Increased global production, particularly from Saudi Arabia, was able to ease prices from its highs.)
      http://www.commodityonline.com/news/Crude-oil-Iran-geopolitical-risks-the-new-threat-to-supplies-43649-3-1.html

      3. It can be done in concert with the Saudis, with little effect on the world, very few or no casualties, and eliminate the Iranian Nuclear Weapon Program.
      (It won’t stop crude oil speculators from driving the price of crude oil up though at the prospect of another major conflict in the Middle East. Even recent rumors of conflict in Iran have driven the price of crude up over $100 a barrel this week.)

      5. He is a puppet. He works for the Mullahs.
      (Why would you want to enrich the Mullahs even more than they already are then???)

      6. Neither do I.
      (Amen!)

      Report Post »  
    • Buck Shane
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:30pm

      @ KidCharlemagne
      1. This link is not where you are incorrect. The Soviet Union was not trying to police the world – they were trying to conquer it. Reagan forced them to spend too much for their military. That is what broke them.
      2. Were I in charge, I could do the job with little damage to world oil prices.
      3. Stopping the Iran bomb can be done without a major spike.
      4. The Mullahs are bad people. I would not enrich them; I would break them.

      Report Post » Buck Shane  
  • Gauleiter
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:31pm

    After CBS gave Dr. Paul a mere 89 seconds in their debate, they follow up with this?!? Schrieffer is a fool of a man, and a liar. It isn’t the American people who deserved an attack, it was policies set forth by men who put their self interest ahead of the nation. It‘s the policy that’s the problem, not the people!!!

    Also someone send Bobby the definition of blow-back… it isn’t a coincidence that that term was coined by our CIA. Good grief!

    Report Post » Gauleiter  
  • pwatkins
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:27pm

    Ron Paul is a nut…sorry to be so rude, but there is no other way to explain his words. I wish him the best in life but not as POTUS. He would be as dangerous as Obama and most of his followers are kids that have no knowledge of the dangers we face…..kind of like OWS LOONS.

    Report Post »  
    • hidden_lion
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:56pm

      We have far worse dangers here at home. We are in no position to force our will on other nations. You can’t negotiate from a position of weakness. Ron Paul speaks the simple truth,a truth that is too hard to swallow for those of you who think it is OK to violate other nation’s sovereignty. Fact is, if we were to go to war with Iran, who would pay for it? Do you think China is going to loan us more money? Reality is a pain, we need to get our house in order, Ron Paul is the only one who will even try.

      Report Post » hidden_lion  
    • NoNannyState4me
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:07pm

      I feel sorry for you Pwatkins. You’re afraid of your own shadow, it could fool your visual perspective and is dangerous. Crazy ******* and other sects wouldn‘t attack the USA if the USA wasn’t in their business all the time. We have not attacked one country in the last 70 years that had the ability to do any damage to us whatsoever and as a matter of fact none of them tried as a country to do any attacks on us now had they any plans. War is only good for US politicians that are able to garner it in their own image. Right now, Obamallama is trying hard to out do the chickenhawk neocons that he decried in his bid to be the ruler of the free world. America is ignorant these days, but we can be the best again if people like Twatkins here get a sack and take care of their own business.

      Report Post » NoNannyState4me  
    • Shasta
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:47pm

      Watch out @pwatkins, if you say anything negative about Mr. Paul, the Paulies will attack you, call you a moron, ignorant, un-american, and then they will tell you they feel sorry for you for being so stupid.

      Report Post » Shasta  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:00am

      @shasta I support Paul’s candidacy and his Plan to Restore America. I discuss topics and issues. Not all of his supporters use name calling. I for one, do my utmost to be respectful. I do not demean or verbally attack any person or their character.

      However, this name calling and childish behavior goes both ways. I’ve read Paul supporters being called, by fellow Conservatives, anti-American, leftists, liberals, progressives, haters of America, crazy, wacky, potheads, stupid, idiots, trolls, zombies, crackheads, paulbots, paulistinians, druggies, hippies, obama bots, smokers, drunkards, fornicators, obama supporters, plants, por smokers, looney, nuts, fringe, extremist, racist, anti-semite, nazis, anarchists, tin foil hat folks, morons, etc.

      We all need to grow up and learn how to communicate to each other with civility. Love your neighbor as yourself. Respect all men. Be meek, humble, peaceful, and graceful.

      When I realized America had become immoral and unchristian in her conversation, I didn‘t think I’d witness this behavior and immaturity so rampant here on the Blaze. Let’s discuss policies, Laws, philosophical ideas, issues and topics with actual facts, primary sources and credible references. Leave the slanderous name calling and character demoralization to the Marxist Left wing media, and let’s call them out on their mischief and bias. Let’s think before we speak. Let’s not allow our frustrations get the worst out of us. God, Unity, and Liberty.

      Report Post »  
    • Jeff65
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 6:34am

      @pwatkins No your not sorry. That makes you a lier as well as an idiot and I would probably have to include you with the bed wetters.

      You speak of a man that has predicted the terrorism and wars and economic mess, as a nut? It’s one thing looking back and interpreting history, but it is a completely different predicting it years in advance.

      You might as well join the ranks of Cain who called Peter Schiff and Ron Paul ignorant and irresponsible for saying that the housing prices were going to collapse. That makes you and Cain nuts with conclusive proof — unlike the speculative “evidence” that you and your likes supply for saying Dr. Paul is nuts.

      Next time you want to say something about Ron Paul, consider first if you have anything worth while saying.

      Report Post »  
    • Jeff65
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 6:46am

      @SHASTA You and pwatkins combined haven’t had as much real content to your comments as a single sentence of 99% of the Ron Paul supporters.

      You just go from post to post saying the same nonsense with your self righteous attitude. So the only thing I can do is to answer a fool according to his folly.

      Report Post »  
  • Okie from Muskogee
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:25pm

    Good job Ron Paul… Great interview…. 

    I do not know why so many are fooled into the progressive foreign policy that have caused the problems of today. 

    Ron Paul is right on foreign policy. 

    Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • smokeysmoke
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:57pm

      but you are neglecting that we created a military force to act aggresivly against the barbary pirates… to defend our own people and mercants abroad… so wouldent the result of this action be, we made available the options of making different forms of peace with african nations…. they would just steal and pillage unless they had a MAN o WAR on em….

      Report Post » smokeysmoke  
    • pug01
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:55pm

      paul’s forign policys are flat out wrong, and that is why i will never support someone that has views of are military like that. i agree with Col. North 100 percent. read his artcle on the next war and how paul would be very unprepared.

      http://townhall.com/columnists/olivernorth/2011/11/18/the_next_war

      Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:12pm

      @OKIE ..what’s the matter .. anyone who is part of the TEA Party “must” support Paul .. give it a break .. I can and do support those who are not of the establishment .. but Paul .. I will say it .. is a NUT! Paul didn’t start the TEA Party .. and he sure as H doesn’t own it .. and as for me going away in any manner or form … you go on wishing .. isn’t going to happen! Why the personal attacks anyway .. it a NERVE!

      TEA!

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:58pm

      @CatB

      I’m going to embarrass you because you are too proud to admit your own progressive views. If you have any honor or integrity you will admit them. Let’s see what you choose to do. 

      “What’s the matter“ Is ”nuts” (insane), you know doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result, like YOU, have tried to label themselves TEA when they are supporting the very views that have created this progressive state. (insanity)

      Taxed
      Enough
      Already
      Is what TEA means and the reason was started was Ron Paul protest over the non Federal Reserve because the non Federal Reserve drives and creates the tax policy. Wars create more taxes. Policing the world create more taxes. Welfare, foreign and domestic, creates more taxes. Spending creates more taxes. 

      So, whether your candidate you support is ‘establishment’ or not is irrelevant. If your candidate supports any of the above, you are hypocritical of your stance on TEA. YOU are being NUTTY because YOU expect voting in someone who supports the very thing YOU supposedly stand against will FIX or RESTORE anything. That by definition is INSANITY, NUTS, LOCO….

      True TEA members should have Stood long ago against phonies and CRAZIES like you who are either too proud to admit their own progressiveness or just too CRAZY to realize it. It’s been laid out clearly for you, so you decide which you are. Until you change your views, you will be called out. 

      TEA!

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:08pm

      Can the Tea Party unite with Libertarians?
      Ron Paul, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Judge Napolitano meet
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A528cdAYaU

      2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul was endorsed today by Cedar Rapids Tea Party founder Tim Pugh

      Report Post »  
    • KTsayz
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:19pm

      Jeez, CatB, are you EVER ignorant about HIStory.
      On December 16th, 2007, Ron Paul supporters created their own Tea Party to celebrate the day as a fundraiser. They called themselves TeaParty2007.
      Watch and learn
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYRLqwPQQuo&feature=related

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG_OwTthS-E

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:59pm

      @SmokeySmoke

      Because those pirates attacked our people. We did not attack them first nor did we “nation build” them. We used DEFENSE. If war is needed Congress can bring a vote about it and define it. A good President does not rattle sabers for war…A good wise President knows the harms of war, it’s destruction both to the enemy and us. A good President fights off war at all possibility until Congress forces him to act. Then such President lays the hammer down and fights to win. 

      @Pug01

      Col North who sold weapons to Iran thru Israel to fund another brutal group in South America? Hahahaha! Seriously? The guy sold Iran weapons thru Israel. I’ll repeat again, the guy sold IRAN weapons thru ISRAEL. Keep in mind we were supporting Iraq in the same war…

      Nothing Col North said I would trust. A good man named Mike Scheuer I trust with my life. He speaks truth….

      http://non-intervention.com/

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:22am

      @smokeysmoke Jefferson went after those Barbary Muslim Pirates through Constitutional Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Paul, likewise, wrote a constitutional Letter of Marque to go after Bin Laden and his terrorist minions. He co-sponsored a bill to go into Afghanistan to capture those responsible for terrorist attacks, like Al Qaeda. He urged Congress and the federal administration to go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden, when most other officials doubted he was even there. He is in favor of Pilots being armed and ready for defense, and that we should profile and investigate real suspects in an airport, and stop bothering our daughters and grandmothers. He was in Congress when Israel bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear plant in 1981 and was among a very very few that defended Israel’s right to do so. He has said, “Once war is declared, it must be waged according to Just War principles. We should only fight when it’s in our national security interest, and we should no longer do the corrupt United Nation’s bidding by policing the world.” I too believe we should Constitutional declare War, fight it, defeat our enemies, win it, end it, and bring our troops back home.

      Report Post »  
    • colt1860
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 12:29am

      The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature … the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war. – Madison

      The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. – Washington

      The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and defend against aggression – to preserve freedom and peace. – Ronald Reagan

      Report Post »  
  • Sue Dohnim
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:19pm

    I like Ron Paul and and agree with him on many things but he is just too naive on foreign policy..

    Liberty and freedoms are the exception in history, not the norm and they must be aggressively and constantly defended from enemies foreign and domestic.

    Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • smokeysmoke
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:29pm

      i see it two ways with ron…. if we had been using his foriegn policy for the past 30 years…. mabey he would prove to be right with alot of his opinions… but i feel like he is neglecting some very serious threats, mainly those from islamo fasciest regimes that are rallying around hate of israel and the us… i just dont know how, not challanging these idologies directly we do any good…. but there is so much i like about ron paul.. i think he beats out most of the other republican canidates

      Report Post » smokeysmoke  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:32pm

      So your position is the founding fathers were naive, as well. Good one :)

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • Stephan D. Markos
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:33pm

      The true enemy of freedom is the state.

      Report Post »  
    • smokeysmoke
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:36pm

      ummmm no you do realize that AT OUR FOUNDING WE PAID TRIPOLI 15% OF OUR GNP… OF OUR NATION… THIS IS WHY WASHINGTON BUILT A NAVY… THIS WAS OUR FIRST WAR… IN 6 YEARS AFTER THE FOUNDING…. SO MABEY YOU ARE IGNORANT TO REALITY

      Report Post » smokeysmoke  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:47pm

      Mmmmmhm still, the the founders extolled the virtues of Allying with none and trading happily with all. I‘m not ignorant to what happened with the pirates in the Mediterranean that caused the wonderful line ’to the shores of tripoli’ to be a part of the Marine Corps anthem. Guess what happened in 1801, Jefferson broke the treaty and would not pay what you are discussing. Did you miss that part in your studies? Tripoli declared war on the United States and our Navy and Marines went to work. Sorry, you are incorrect.

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • NoNannyState4me
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:11pm

      Naive about foreign policy is thinking that going to Offensive War with our DEFENSE budget is of ANY help to America whatsoever. War used to be profitable for a country like the USA, naive is thinking that it still is. Try putting a Fleet of ship around the ocean border of America and let the other parts of the world implode without our bombs helping them every time eh? Chickenhawks, the lot of you.
      Ron Paul 2012

      Report Post » NoNannyState4me  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:40pm

      @A CONSERVATARIAN

      Geopolitics, global finance and the cabal of Transnational globalists are a growing and far greater threat now than they were then or ever. Ideally, this wouldn’t be the case and Paul would be correct but I believe he underestimates the real threat.

      The problem is a corrupt financial system, the US$ global reserve status means that the US must defend that position. Like it or not.. The saying is true “control the money and you control the world”. It is bad situation to be in but it is reality. China and Russia are positioning to be players in a new global reserve system. As corrupt as it is, someone will control it and that better be the good guys and that takes a military and an aggressive foreign policy that defends liberty and freedom. AND yes, I agree that that has not always been the case.

      IMO, if Ron Pauls foreign policy were implemented today, the US would undergo a financial collapse and the rest of the world would fall to hardcore socialism. The weakened US would be more vulnerable from within to socialism..

      Don’t confuse idealism with reality… and I do believe that Ron Pauls character and honesty is bar none, but he underestimates the enemy.

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • cous1933
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:50pm

      The Blaze posts are filled with slanderous lies and misrepresentations of Ron Paul, mostly by the same handful of haters. They are funny to read but should never be given a second thought. They are ridiculous and expose the poster as a fool.
      However the posts that call Ron Paul “naive” are particularly aggravating. By calling Paul naive, the poster is essentially saying that they have more knowledge of the subject that Paul does.
      That is incredibly arrogant.
      I would ask these posters where they received their “inside” information.
      I assume it comes from two sources, the media and the government. (Please correct me if I’m wrong).
      I’m also willing to bet that these same posters often feel that the media and the government will lie to the public to promote an agenda. So why is it that when the information released to the public keeps us in a perpetual state of war, these posters believe it whole-heartedly?
      I’m absolutely certain that someone here is naive, but it’s not Ron Paul.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:10pm

      @COUS1933

      Ridiculous rhetoric and strawman fallacy…

      You Ron Paul people act like Libs when Paul is criticized, you act like children.

      He is not perfect, his foreign policy is naive and I do like the guy..

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:14pm

      Dr. Paul serves on the House Foreign Relations Committee, so maybe he knows a bit more than we “average citizens.” I trust him — more than any politician on two feet.

      I’m new to Dr. Paul’s campaign (just this year). I always pulled the “R-lever” before. Obama showed me how much money Bush spent. LOL I was also ticked at Bush II for not closing the borders. What the heck is wrong with America? Neither Democrats, nor Republicans want to close the border – even after 9/11? I was also tired of constant war, so I started searching for answers. I stumbled upon an Alex Jones YouTube and was shocked. Fox News had already told me Jones is a conspiracy nut, but I investigated anyway. Once I found United Nations Agenda 21 was real — all the light bulbs went off. Everything in the political scene since Bush I made perfect sense. The light bulb went off “Both parties want the same thing!”

      Jones also mentioned Ron Paul. I didn’t know much about him, but I started listening to the great YouTube videos supporters uploaded. I’m a 60 year old Christian Tea Party lady and you must imagine my shock at thinking about legalizing drugs, and such. I was also shocked by the crude language of some of the supporters. The truth I settled upon is that I could TRUST Dr. Paul. Even if I’m afraid of some things that could happen, in the long run I was convinced that Dr. Paul could save America and the Constitution! The few negatives I perceive are nothing compared to the greatness that Dr

      Report Post »  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:23pm

      I agree completely that a war of globalization will occur and it is ramping up. The one and only way globalization is defeated is by strong nationalization, nationalization as in, back to the constitution and outlaw the federal reserve. The one thing that will help end the reign of the banks is if the strongest nation in the world destroys their stranglehold (here) and shows the rest of the world that it is advantageous, profitable and moral to look only to your own nation (not private citizens of other nations) for providing currency. There is only one candidate that can fight the hell you describe Sue :) lovely posting you do btw.

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:31pm

      …….Sue… well, beautiful posting, minus the part where you infer I act like a child too if I see Paul criticized. I just look for flaws in arguments; I don’t throw tantrums. If I see someone acting idiotic, I have no problem dropping down a notch to tell em like it is.

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • cous1933
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:46pm

      Sue,
      Unless I misunderstand the definition of naive, when one calls another naive, the implication is that the accused lacks knowledge (certainly in comparison to the accuser) on the subject in question. That is not rhetoric or strawman. Since you accuse Paul of having an inferior grasp of foreign policy (when compared to you), please tell what sources your information comes from. As Vechorik noted, Pauls position in the House Foreign Relations Committee should probably give him some inside information that you and I don’t have. Just because you disagree with his foreign policy doesn’t make him naive, it just means that you disagree. Whether you want to admit it or not, the possibility exists that you are wrong and he is right. It is wrong (and in my opinion arrogant) to say that he is naive.

      In regards to saying that Ron Paul people act like “libs” or “children” because we defend Dr. Paul against false personal attacks, …. we’ve been called all sorts of things and I believe that we are still more civil than most who oppose Paul.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • cous1933
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:53pm

      By the way Sue, in my first post when I addressed the handful of ridiculous haters, that was not directed at you, those posters know who they are.
      I only take exception to the description of Paul as “naive”. I believe that he is very informed and is taking the correct position on foreign policy in accordance with the Constitution and also with Christian just war principles established by St. Augutine of Hippo.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:10pm

      @A CONSERVATARIAN

      No, I didn’t intend to group you in with that comment, but I have just read too many commenters who are unable to accept any criticism of Ron Paul.

      I hope you really understand my argument, You simply can’t go from the reality of where the world is today to where Ron Paul believes without jeopardizing a complete collapse. Strong Nationalization is important, but you must defend the values and ideology of liberty and freedom throughout the world. The enemies of the US are spreading their ideology throughout the world (and in the US) and if they succeed, the US will fall from the economic crisis. If the US turns too National then foreign countries will dump the US$ as the global reserve, thy will be forced to. Russia and China will step up and the world is lost to tyranny.
      This is based on the premise that the US is exceptional and the exception, the natural historical state of nations and societies is tyranny through some form of incrementally severe socialism. So, proactively defending Liberty and freedom throughout the world is the key. The real problem is that the US is an “open and free society” even though Soros co-opted that term, Russia and China are closed, they are controlled tyrannies. So, it is not a level ideological playing field. Therefore, the only way to fight them is to maintain the the US$ global status and spread the ideology of freedom and liberty throughout the world. IMO, your “nationalism” is ideal but not realistic in toda

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:42pm

      @cous1933

      It is a fallacy to assume that since a politician sits on a Committee that they are all knowing and above criticism. I do believe that fundamentally Ron Paul has underestimated, as most Americans have, the threats to the US and its Freedoms and Liberties from external and internal actors. I believe this after hearing, over the years, the public comments from Ron Paul and contrasting those statements with my assessments of the current geopolitical and global economic environment. In fact, I have no doubt that he and anyone who supports his position is underestimating the situation.

      Are you willing to risk the possibility that he is wrong and has underestimated the threat?

      Liberty and Freedom as an ideology is very fragile and under attack, it can be lost very easily and it will be gone forever…

      I don’t disagree with idealism, but the US and the world is just too fragile to take the chance..

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • cous1933
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:04pm

      Sue,

      I am not trying to keep an argument going with you but I must respond to the comment (that seems to be directed, at least partly, to me) that some posters “are unable to accept any criticism of Ron Paul”.
      I only respond to criticisms of Paul that I feel are false or unfair. For example if you simply state that you disagree with Ron Pauls policy, for the reasons you expressed in later posts, I would not have replied to you at all. I don’t agree with your predictions of what would result if we followed a non-interventionist foreign policy, but you are entitled to your opinion and I would not have replied at all. However when people call Paul “naive” or “isolationist” or other false descriptions, I will reply to defend Paul against what I see as patently false accusations.
      You are clearly an intelligent person who has looked into important issues further than many on The Blaze (who apparently are only here to troll and look for petty arguments). I hope we can agree to disagree on Pauls foreign policy without any further disparaging words.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:15pm

      @Sue

      All your posts are the perfect example of the progressive movements views. “We better conquer and rule the World before someone else does”. 

      China and Russia are wanting another currency because we ruined ours by the non Federal Reserve Ron Paul wants to reign in and end. Return of a sound dollar would secure the world would want it. Continuing the progressive scheme of devaluing it will lead to a global currency with Russia and China possibly leaders of. 

      Advancing “democracy” and “liberty” thru financial and military means is exactly what has led to the problems of today. It’s the Progressive way. 

      I say you are being naive and do not understand the enemy, especially Muslim jihad enemy. bin Laden’s jihadists do not attack us because we are free here, they attack us because we are foreigners in their land corrupting in their view their countries and way of life by trying to “advance” “democracy”….Continuing this advancement thru money and war will only strengthen and legitimize this jihad. In fact, it plays right into bin Laden’s goals. 

      -Bleed America financially dry-Check
      -Spread American military and intel as thin as possible-Check
      -Cause dissent in America and between her allies-Check

      Iran wants nothing more then for an US attack. It will unite all Muslims to fight the US under Shia belief. It will bleed America financially, it will spread us thinner, and it will cause dissent. 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • cous1933
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 9:28pm

      Sue,
      My last post was made before I saw your 8:42 post to me – so now I will reply to that.
      I am willing to risk the possibility that Paul has underestimated the risk that we face across the world for two reasons.
      1. I am confident that Paul has at least a reasonable grasp of the real threat and if he has underestimated it, I’m sure that he will make the responsible adjustments, as he has always demonstrated a very mature sense of responsibility. Paul has always stated that we will have a very strong military for defensive purposes.
      2. I believe that the much bigger threat that America faces right now is from within, in the nearly inevitable collapse of our economy. I believe that the bold spending cuts that Paul has proposed can possibly turn this runaway train around. Of course a large part of those cuts entails reigning in our empire (in other words the military actions and positions of offense rather than defense). I believe that if this isn’t done, it will be a much more certain end to our Republic than any foreign threat poses.

      Report Post » cous1933  
    • Sue Dohnim
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 10:14pm

      @OKIE FROM MUSKOGEE

      C’mon your being silly. you have mischaracterized my argument and labelled it progressive. I can assure you that I am no progressive. Strawmanning everyone that disagrees with your views as a progressive and then attacking them is too low for me to respond.

      Report Post » Sue Dohnim  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 11:18pm

      @Sue

      If you are no progressive you will clearly show error in my assessment of your views. I do not call your views progressive to insult you, I point them out because progressives have distorted truth and called many of their views ‘conservative’ and over time, decades, many of us hold these progressive views believing they are ‘conservative’, aggressive foreign policy is one of them….

      Please explain to me how a conservative holds an aggressive foreign policy….Does agress contradict conserve. 

      I understand progressiveness to be aggressive…Why? Because Glenn Beck exposed progressives desire to rule the World, not just America…

      “if Ron Pauls foreign policy were implemented today, the US would undergo a financial collapse” – What is your reasoning for this statement? If we continue printing fake money will we collapse? Will Ron Paul continue the printing of money ? 

      “the rest of the world would fall to hardcore socialism”

      Isn’t most of the world socialist or communist already? 

      “The weakened US would be more vulnerable from within to socialism..”

      Continuing the same policies we have held that has led to American weakening: financially, liberties, and securities will garuntee communism if not transition to the one world government. 

      Look forward to your thoughts. 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
  • lukerw
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:15pm

    I oppose the Progressive/Socialist policies of the Gov’t… Republican & Democrat… but that does not mean Conservative Policies would not Work! I oppose an Iran with Atomic & ICBMs… and I would neutralize them! Paul… seems to have a “special” theory… that does not match any history nor Common Sense!

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • CatB
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:22pm

      Agreed .. he is right on a lot (economy) .. BUT wrong on so much more that would also threatend our safety and that of our allies.

      TEA!

      I wish he would retire .. I would like to hear more of what Rand Paul has to say .. he has stated that he doesn’t agree with his father on all things .. I would like to know what he doesn’t agree with .. perhaps it is time for Ron to get out of the way of his son.

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:29pm

      @CATB
      Yes… everything that Rand seems to say… makes me think… analyze… and finially agree.

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:35pm

      Lukerw….match history? He happens to say the same exact things our founding fathers do regarding foreign policy annnnnnnnd you’re ignoring that part?

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:01pm

      I wish CatB would retire…She first posts “TEA” yet supports someone who supports what she is protesting. She then does not support the person who started the idea of TEA! how dumb is that? 

      CatB post comments like this:

      “Agreed .. he is right on a lot (economy) .. BUT wrong on so much more that would also threatend our safety and that of our allies.”

      Notice she can not articulate what she doesn’t like. What CatB doesn’t get is she supports a PROGRESSIVE foreign policy. Intervention is a PROGRESSIVE policy… “We know better than sovereign Nations so we will tell them what to do either thru monetary rewards or force.”  That same policy will soon be used on America thru agenda 21 thanks to those like CatB who support it. 

      If you are against agenda 21, you are for Ron Paul and non-intervention. 
      If you are for a progressive foreign policy, you are for agenda 21…

      Which are you CatB? 

      TEA! 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • sissykatz
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:22pm

      Okie
      I think CatB articulated quiet well what she meant. Most of us agree
      with some of Pauls Ideas, I agree we should bring the military home
      from all the bases around the different countries and close the bases.
      However I think allowing Iran and the Idiots that rule there to have the
      capabilities to destroy us and Israel is Completely Crazy…..

      I think Ron Paul runs for President every 4yrs. just for his ego. He gets a
      big charge out of the “Supporters” praising him. The rest of America thinks
      he is a loon. If he wins the nomnation however I will support him.

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:35pm

      @Sissy

      CatB didn’t articulate anything, she simple said she didn’t like Ron Paul. Articulate means to explain WHY….

      Progressives, interventionists, believe they can tell idiot Nations such as Iran what they can or cannot have. That’s world government way of thinking. You get that don’t you?  Non interventionists believe we can simply react to what idiot Nations do. It’s called DEFENSE, not OFFENSE. 

      Most of America is progressed either in foreign policy or domestic policy, sometimes both. Ron Paul’s view are strait Constitutional on both accounts. No one praises Ron Paul, we praise his views. 

      No way he runs for his “ego”….Good try though… Only ones who say that are those who have no argument against his views. 

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
    • CatB
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 6:53pm

      @OKIE ..

      .. anyone who is part of the TEA Party “must” support Paul .. give it a break .. I can and do support those who are not of the establishment .. but Paul .. I will say it .. is a NUT! And most of his supporters do so for one reason .. legalization of DRUGS.

      Paul didn’t start the TEA Party .. and he sure as H doesn’t own it .. and as for me going away in any manner or form … you go on wishing .. isn’t going to happen! Why the personal attacks anyway .. hit a NERVE?!

      TEA!

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:46pm

      @CATB You just hit a nerve with me…I do not like the idea of legalizing drugs…yet I support Dr Paul…The reason? Can you see how much money is in the illegality of drugs..thereby instead of making it a War on Drugs..it has become a DRUG WAR? Do you see how the middleeastern countries have survived off the drug trade? Do you see how law enforcement has gotten involved in the drug trade? Have you seen how Obama and Holder have furnished weapons to the Hezbollah Drug Cartel in Mexico and now the Cartel holds Mexico hostage and are using threats to influence voting at the polls? Do you see Obama suing Arizona and other states who try to prevent this element from entering our country? If we take out the money//the incentive…there is a good possibility that the problem will not be so far reaching. Paul wants to give the states and voters the rights to legalize or criminalize..he doesn’t want it at a Federal level..

      Report Post »  
    • Okie from Muskogee
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 8:06pm

      @CatB

      I’m going to embarrass you because you are too proud to admit your own progressive views. If you have any honor or integrity you will admit them. Let’s see what you choose to do. 

      “What’s the matter“ Is ”nuts” (insane), you know doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result, like YOU, have tried to label themselves TEA when they are supporting the very views that have created this progressive state. (insanity)

      Taxed
      Enough
      Already
      Is what TEA means and the reason was started was Ron Paul protest over the non Federal Reserve because the non Federal Reserve drives and creates the tax policy. Wars create more taxes. Policing the world create more taxes. Welfare, foreign and domestic, creates more taxes. Spending creates more taxes. 

      So, whether your candidate you support is ‘establishment’ or not is irrelevant. If your candidate supports any of the above, you are hypocritical of your stance on TEA. YOU are being NUTTY because YOU expect voting in someone who supports the very thing YOU supposedly stand against will FIX or RESTORE anything. That by definition is INSANITY, NUTS, LOCO….

      True TEA members should have Stood long ago against phonies and CRAZIES like you who are either too proud to admit their own progressiveness or just too CRAZY to realize it. It’s been laid out clearly for you, so you decide which you are. Until you change your views, you will be called out. 

      TEA!!!

      Report Post » Okie from Muskogee  
  • Cherynn
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:14pm

    I like Ron Pauls opinions on Constitutional governance and freedom but his foreign policy leaves ALOT to be desired. We need to maintain a very strong defence abroad, especially in dealing with Iran.

    Report Post » Cherynn  
  • A Conservatarian
    Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:12pm

    Alright Blaze, wtf is going on, y’all have posted 3 articles about Dr. Paul in the last couple days

    Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • garyM
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:21pm

      The Blaze is giving all the Paulies enough info to make a good decision, many will ignore any info. I hope they start giving they same info on Romney and Huntsman soon, they are as ignorant as Ron Paul!

      Report Post »  
    • A Conservatarian
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:31pm

      ToolbagM ignorance as I’ve seen it on this site, is best represented by yourself. Everything Dr. Paul said, I agree with completely. Sorry ToolbagM, you just made a comment-fail.

      Report Post » A Conservatarian  
    • ronaldreaganthegreat
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:39pm

      good question!

      Report Post » ronaldreaganthegreat  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 5:39pm

      GARYM Posted on November 20, 2011 at 4:21pm
      The Blaze is giving all the Paulies enough info to make a good decision, many will ignore any info. I hope they start giving they same info on Romney and Huntsman soon, they are as ignorant as Ron Paul!
      Oh yes Gary.. let me guess who your pick is…would it be Cain?
      Cain chairman of the Federal reserve and mocker of ones who wanted it audited? That Cain?
      Cain who is alledgedly involved in a lawsuit where he bilked employees out of retirement money and paid millions to his cronies…sounds similar to the bailouts to me.That Cain?
      Cain.. who went with TARP giving 700 billion to Sharia Compliant Banks
      Cain..who belongs to a liberal progressive church who has donned Jessee Jackson as speaker. Jackson .who alingns himself with Jermiah Wright and Louis Farrakan.. Cain.. who also has a liberal wife.
      Cain who wants to do away with Social Security and Medicare and wants you or your parents , and the disabled to go and beg a church for help
      Cain with his 999 plan that will drive up the cost of goods exponentially. 9%flat tax 9% sales tax 9% natioanl sales tax…as if that alone won’t kill the economy ..just think of the precedent it would set for the raising of your taxes on regular basis…nowhere to run…nowhere to hide..cuz Cain’s going to get it all.So as far as RINO‘s go I doubt seriously that Romney has the skeleton’s in his closet.
      Romney will dance circles around Cain!

      Report Post »  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on November 20, 2011 at 7:35pm

      What does it matter? BHO will declare martial law and there will be no 2012 elections. BHO is sitting in the WH laughing his skinny butt off and his wife is laughing her fat butt off at a NASCAR event even after being booed.

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • Fella
      Posted on November 21, 2011 at 11:26am

      GARYM used to be a Cain supporter. He’s on the Newt bandwaggon now. Eventually he’ll be rallying for Romney like a good little neocon zombie.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 ... 7

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love