By Thom Paine – the Independent Realist
Recently, well, actually yesterday, as I was on Facebook
I noticed a wall posting promoting Ron Paul. Although the posting was decidedly
biased in favor of Paul, I went ahead and read the post and watched to pro-Ron
Paul video that had been attached to it. Simply put, it was a nice presentation
of Ron Paul talking points, most (if not all) I had read before when I did my
review
of him.
Now, I would like to point out that I do agree with some
of Ron Paul’s views, and when I responded to the Facebook post, I indicated the
same. I then went on to explain the Ron Paul policies that I did not care for,
and I used my review of Paul (as well as the sources accompanying the review)
as a source for my response.
Although I would dearly love to include each and every
post in that Facebook debate, I cannot. The reason being, is that the Ron Paul
supporter (we’ll call him “John”) has either deleted the entire discussion, or
has since limited his “wall” posts to his Facebook friends only. Either way,
they are now unavailable to me. That being said, however, I was able to copy
all of his responses to my posts in this discussion, all but his original post,
and my first two responses. Read ahead to witness someone who is so enamored
with his political candidate of choice that he will eschew all rational
discussion and revert to insults, mockery, and belittlement. If this is any
indication of how the candidate himself thinks, then I can assure you that I
would rather eat barbed wire than vote for Ron Paul. [Note, I have included
those portions of the discussion that I was able retrieve verbatim. Please
excuse John’s spelling and grammatical errors, as I think I upset him].
Photo
of Ron Paul and "John" (face obscured for his privacy), from John’s Facebook
photo album
The first post by John contained little more than Ron
Paul talking points, and although it did not attack any other candidate or
point of view, I still responded with my view points (as is common on
Facebook), and I pointed out my disagreement with Paul’s stance that the 9/11
attacks were America’s fault, his condoning of embryonic stem cell research,
and his view that should individual states choose to legalize heroin, meth,
prostitution or shariah law, then that was okay by him. John’s response was:
John
wrote: "@ thom: you have completely distorted dr. paul's
views - for example: 9/11 is not our "fault", but we encourage
hostility by policing the world and nation-building! they don't hate us for our
"freedom" as some simpletons would have you believe, they focus their
irrational hated at us BECAUSE WE ARE IN THEIR COUNTRIES! how you would you
feel if china was policing our nation? why do we not follow dr. paul by return
to our conservative principles and pulling out of the UN and NATO and NOT
police the world and NOT nation-build (neither of which we can afford!), and
FOLLOW our Constitution by a congressional declaration of war which republicans
and democrats both neglected! "It is our true policy to steer clear of
entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of
conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial
relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible."
- Ggeorge Washington “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States
never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. 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
(1823) "In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe
may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment,
is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home." - George
Washington suggesting ron paul doesn't respect the life of an unborn baby is a
complete lie - you need to research dr. paul's record before you make such
accusations. che: Ron Paul on Abortion and Stem Cell Research: http://www.facebook.com/l/tAQDoNZs3/www.youtube.com/watch?v=66jpPCIzza8 ron
paul on stem cell: http://www.facebook.com/l/kAQB93InW/www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tNLcJ_RVWs&feature=related as
far as saying ron paul WANTS to legalize heroin, etc - it is another distortion
of the truth! what dr. paul wants IS TO FOLLOW OUR CONSTITUTION and let the
states regulate themselves on such matters! "The powers delegated by the
proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those
which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
- James Madison (Father of the US Constitution and author of Federalist No. 45)
how is following the advice of our founding fathers and sticking to our
constitutional restrictions of the federal government the same as obama? you
probably don't think obamacare is constitutional, but then you want to grow the
federal government's regulating powers beyond the insight of our founders and
cage of our constitution and strip the states of powers. can't pick and choose
when to follow the constitution when it suits you or when not to or you are
just as tyrannical as the left (and right). it's not just about dr. paul, but
the constitutional platform which he defends! show me any other candidate that
does so and i'll support them as well, but there is none... i'm serious about
that: i challenge you to show me which presidential candidate is as principled
and defends the conservative/constitutional platform as dr. paul - i'm all
ears!"
My response to this was to indicate that I had not
distorted Ron Paul’s views. I merely pointed out that in Paul saying that the
singular motivation behind the terrorist attacks on 9/11 was America’s presence
in a foreign country was akin to saying the attacks were our fault, which is
exactly what Paul is saying. We are there so they attacked us. If we were not
there, they would not have attacked us. I pointed out that I had studied the
koran and that the koran instructs all true muslims to attack and kill all
non-muslims whether they are in their country or not, and the subjugation of
all religions and all non-muslims is the goal if islam. This is what the koran
teaches. I did not say that Ron Paul wanted to legalize heroin, I said (and as
it was written, all John had to do was read what I wrote) that Paul’s viewpoint
was if a state wanted to legalize heroin it was okay by him. He would allow
that. I took that reasoning to its logical conclusion to point out that
following Paul’s line of reasoning, if a state wanted to legalize crack houses,
meth labs, or brothels next door to elementary schools, or if they wanted to
implement shariah law in their state, then he would do nothing to stop them. I
also provided a video link in which Ron Paul clearly states that as long as
embryonic stem cell research does not result in an abortion of the unborn baby,
then he says it is okay by him (Video Link Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jatLLsO3Ts).
My view is that no unborn child should ever be used for experimental research.
Since John challenged me to provide him with the name of another presidential
candidate who is “principled and defends the conservative/constitutional
platform,” I offered up my candidate of choice, Herman Cain. John’s response,
as well as the remainder of our discussion – verbatim, is as follows:
John
wrote: "@ thom: i don't know how much more simple i can
present the fact our intervention in other countries is the reason they dislike
us. how do we know this? BECAUSE THEY SAY THAT'S WHY THEY DISLIKE US! if you
think they are lying about why (for some unknown reason), listen to the insight
of the Former CIA unit in charge of hunting Bin Laden, Michael Scheuer, who
said: "What they hate us for is the unusually virulent strain of obsessive
compulsive disorder that's present in the American governing class, and that's
called interventionism. That's what the cause of this war is." ...
"That's what the cause of this war is. And neither Mr. McCain, nor Mr.
Obama, nor Mrs. Clinton, nor any of the rest of them who are in the
campaign-except Mr. (Ron) Paul...", http://www.facebook.com/l/pAQD3bVbH/www.nolanchart.com/article2888_Michael_Scheuer_Says_Ron_Paul_Understands_Cause_of_Terrorism.html. apparently you know more
than the former CIA agent in charge of hunting bin laden... if you think they
still hate us for our "freedom", there is no reasoning with you. i do
find it hypocritical of you to think we should continue to abandon conservative
values by disregarding our constitution and police the world and
nation-building and continue to go further into debt in the process... as far
as states exercising their constitutional rights to potentially legalizing some
drugs - you described this as "Following this line of Ron Paul's
reasoning" - that reasoning is the reasoning of our founding fathers and
our constitutional! let's do a quick lesson in founding father history 101 -
again: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal
government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State
governments are numerous and indefinite." - James Madison (Father of the
US Constitution and author of Federalist No. 45) so let me get this straight -
if you had YOUR way, you would remove the leath of the constitution from the
federal government and allow the feds to absorp state rights and assume more
power... as long as you think it's ok, but obamacare is unconstitutional. you
are just as bad as democrats on ignoring our founding fathers and spitting on
our constitutiion. you have NO claim to our history and to Constitutional
principle. in your mind, somehow states are soooo incompetent, that they need
an unconstitutional federal government to stop them from having "crack
houses" next to schools. what state do you live in? how's this - i trust
my state far more than i trust an unconstitutional federal government, but
apparently you think that your "opinion" is more important than the
designs of our founders and our constitutiion. again, you must be a pretty
smart guy... as far as stem cell research - a medical dr. (ron paul) who has
the strongest pro-life record going talks about the complications of stem cell
research, but your apparently hermain cain declined to sign the pro-life
pledge. let's take a further look into hermain cain's record: Herman Cain's
political donation record (OpenSecrets.org): 1. Donated to NY Democrat Rep.
Jose E. Serrano - $250 on 12/23/1993 2. Donated to Nebraska Democrat Sen. Bob
Kerrey - $250 on 9/3/1993 3. Donated to Nebraska Democrat Rep. Peter Hoagland
(Nebraska ’s 2nd District) against Republican Jon Lynn Christensen in 1994. He
gave $500 to Hoagland – but Christensen won as part of the Republican
Revolution of 1994 anyway. 4. Donated to money to Democrat Ben Nelson ( Nebraska
) - $500 on 6/5/1996 and record: 1. Herman Cain supported the TARP bailouts. He
even wrote a column to vigorously argue in favor of the Wall Street bailout in
2008, writing: "Wake up people! Owning a part of the major banks in
America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a
problem." Cain derided opponents of the bailouts as "free market
purists." That sounds more like something Rachel Maddow would call Tea
Partiers than something a true Tea Partier would use as an insult. 2. Herman
Cain enthusiastically endorsed Mitt Romney for President in 2008. Herman Cain
called Mitt Romney his "No. 1 choice" for president. Remember that
Mitt "RINO" brought socialized medicine to Massachusetts as governor,
and his "RomneyCare" legislation would eventually form the blueprint
for ObamaCare, which all true Tea Partiers strongly opposed! How can a
"Tea Party candidate" like Herman Cain endorse someone like Mitt
Romney for president? 3. Herman Cain opposes an audit of the Federal Reserve.
Actually a former chairman of the Federal Reserve bank of Kansas City, Herman
Cain opposes an audit of the Federal Reserve bank and supports its continued
existence and manipulation of our dollar. This isn't even just a Tea Party
issue. 80% of ALL AMERICANS want an audit of the Fed. Herman Cain doesn't. on
second thought, hermain cain's record is clearly conservative and
principled/consistent - if one was a political bisexual (and i hate to insult
bisexuals with that comparison)... strange cain only got 140 votes in the Iowa
Straw Poll..."
No comments:
Post a Comment