Hear about Ron Paul's latest "money bomb"?

[Rick Lee]

This guy's fundraising is getting more impressive than Howard Dean's last time around. Check out the readers' comments below the article.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7421.html

[Moses]

I could get on the Ron Paul train easily except for a few minor points. His pro-life stance troubles me. Not because I'm pro-choice, but because having any governmental policy on such an issue seems at odds with his "less government intrusion" stance.

Ron Paul is right about the money supply.
He's right about immigration.
He's right about Iraq.

As a nation we need to decide if we are an Empire or a Republic. Ron Paul's view is that we are a Republic and we ought to conduct our foreign policy with that in mind. I agree.

Ron Paul is voicing the last breath of a freedom loving independent people who love our Constitution and distrust government. Sadly, Ron Paul's words may be the death-rattle of such thinking. He's a dinosaur. People have grown comfortable with this nanny state we live in. Too bad.

[frogger]

+1

[Rick Lee]

Moses, for all the hype the abortion debate gets in national politics, when's the last time any president made a dime's worth of difference in the legality of abortion? I'm no pro-lifer at all, but Roe v. Wade was a gross perversion of the Constitution and a blatant, yet successful, attempt by the SCOTUS to invent a right that is nowhere to be found in the Const. AFAIK, Paul's position is that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and the abortion issue left to the states. That's exactly how I feel too and I don't believe it will ever be difficult, certainly not illegal, to get an abortion in the U.S.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Moses, for all the hype the abortion debate gets in national politics, when's the last time any president made a dime's worth of difference in the legality of abortion? I'm no pro-lifer at all, but Roe v. Wade was a gross perversion of the Constitution and a blatant, yet successful, attempt by the SCOTUS to invent a right that is nowhere to be found in the Const. AFAIK, Paul's position is that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and the abortion issue left to the states. That's exactly how I feel too and I don't believe it will ever be difficult, certainly not illegal, to get an abortion in the U.S.

Rick,

I gotta go along with youi on that. It's similar to the crap we often hear from the candidates. They feel obligated to take a stance on certain issues that have very little real importance based on what their team perceives the "power" of whatever group is yapping about that issue. Abortion and religion are two of them.

I personally could not care less about either issue...unless someone is trying to impose their views about either one of them on me. We should follow the Cinstitution on both and the gov. should butt out.

It's ridiculous with the true and critical government issues facing our nation that many of the candidates will waste time with mostly sanctimonious drivel about religion and often abortion. I want leaders who will actually govern and try to enable the success of our nation for my grand kids instead of pablum about how religious they may or may not be!

[WI wide body]

[QUOTE=Moses;3650559]I could get on the Ron Paul train easily except for a few minor points. His pro-life stance troubles me. Not because I'm pro-choice, but because having any governmental policy on such an issue seems at odds with his "less government intrusion" stance.

Ron Paul is right about the money supply.
He's right about immigration.
He's right about Iraq.

Moses. those three things you mention above, coupled with our unfunded debt (read that as social security and health care) along with our huge imbalance of trade resulting from stupid trade policy are vastly more important over the long term than abortion or religion. IMHO

We need candidates who can actually understand the above because "terrorism" is not the threat to our nation...it's the clowns in Washington who are on a path to the destruction of our nation...and China and other similar nations might not even need to fire a shot to win that war!

[NICKG]

I think that Ron Paul is the best choice for me...FastPat loves the guy recall all his posts about him

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by NICKG

I think that Ron Paul is the best choice for me...FastPat loves the guy recall all his posts about him

Yeah me too. I always try to vote for someone who can't win (Michael Badnerik was my choice in 2004) and that way nobody can blame me!

[Rick Lee]

Why can't he win? Raising $4 million in one day and then $5.7 million again a few weeks later in small increment implies real grassroots support. Remember, the limit per person is $2300ish for the primary and I believe Paul's avg. contribution is under $100. So those are very impressive numbers for someone who "can't win". He has a real uphill climb, but if he gets the nomination, he'd absolutely destroy Hillary or Obama in debates. Remember, he's the guy who really means what he says and has the Constitution on his side. I'll make the wild guess he knows more about the Const. than all the other candidates combined. That still means something to some people.

[Moses]

Based on his voting record, he'll likely get my vote.

[hytem]

Ron Paul is the kind of politician every conservative should be proud of. Note I said conservative, not Republican. I'm not sure what Republicans stand for these days.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by hytem

Ron Paul is the kind of politician every conservative should be proud of. Note I said conservative, not Republican. I'm not sure what Republicans stand for these days.

+1. I wish he would dial down the "get out of Iraq immediately" a bit. He sounds shrill and turns people off.

[legion]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

+1. I wish he would dial down the "get out of Iraq immediately" a bit. He sounds shrill and turns people off.

As I've said before, that's the single place I don't agree with him.

Are we agreeing again Shaun!?

There must be some good stuff floating around on OT....

[Moses]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

+1. I wish he would dial down the "get out of Iraq immediately" a bit. He sounds shrill and turns people off.

Ron Paul believes that we invaded a sovereign nation under false pretenses. He believes (as I do) that the whole affair is illegitimate.

We had no business invading Iraq. We have no business staying there.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by Moses

Ron Paul believes that we invaded a sovereign nation under false pretenses. He believes (as I do) that the whole affair is illegitimate.

We had no business invading Iraq. We have no business staying there.

That may very well be. But when he starts screeching about it in the debates, I turn off and think this man isn't Presidential, more heretical, not credible.

Sometimes when you want to be effective in making a difference through building consensus, you have to appeal to the masses. You don't have to give up your beliefs or your values, rather you have to convey your position so that everyone can feel good/proud to adopt yours as their own.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by legion

As I've said before, that's the single place I don't agree with him.

Are we agreeing again Shaun!?

There must be some good stuff floating around on OT....

Hey Rearden and I agreed last night on a topic. just beware of herds of flying pigs. all I'm saying.

[Rick Lee]

While I respect Paul's view on Iraq, I strongly disagree that it was illegitimate. When both houses of Congress vote to give the pres. authority he arguably already has, that makes it legit. Maybe Paul will be on the right side of history on this one, but this illegal or illegit stuff doesn't constitute much of an argument for me.

It will be interesting to see if Paul changes his tune at all if he starts becoming a top tier candidate. Right now people like to dismiss him as a kook, especially the media. Otherwise, he's been pretty immune from attacks. But just as Huckabee has become a punching bag since becoming top tier, I will be very curious to see how Paul handles such stature, if he gets there. I would LOVE to watch him debate her thighness or Obama. Man, that would be the first time Hillary has ever had to face a tough question or actually think about a cogent response.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

That may very well be. But when he starts screeching about it in the debates, I turn off and think this man isn't Presidential, more heretical, not credible.

Sometimes when you want to be effective in making a difference through building consensus, you have to appeal to the masses. You don't have to give up your beliefs or your values, rather you have to convey your position so that everyone can feel good/proud to adopt yours as their own.

True.

[legion]

I'm all for a good tilling of the candidates on the Republican side.

[turbo6bar]

Originally Posted by legion

I'm all for a good tilling of the candidates on the Republican side.

I'd settle for killing of most candidates on the elephant side.

I agree with others with regards to Paul's stance on iRaq. Regardless of the whether the war was legitimate, we still have to deal with the mess.