Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
And by we I mean 90% of all of you.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...s/DN-dreher_30edi.State.Edition1.2b92bf2.html

Ron Paul, if only we listened

I didn't vote for Ron Paul in the Republican primary (I was a Mike Huckabee man), nor did I write him in on Election Day (I penciled in farmer-poet Wendell Berry). But no Texan this year did more good for conservatism and his country than the congressman from the coast.

Lord knows there was no Republican in the 2008 campaign who talked straighter.

Dr. Paul – he's a physician – never had a chance, of course. He is too peculiar in his opinions and doesn't know how to spin like a TV slick. What he had was ideas, integrity and authenticity. On the most critical challenges facing America, Dr. Paul was more right than the well-funded GOP regulars who bigfooted the campaign trail.

His best moment came in a May debate aired on Fox News. Dr. Paul asserted that too much U.S. meddling in the Middle East invites terrorist blowback – a conclusion shared by the 9/11 commission and former CIA bin Laden unit chief Michael Scheuer. Rudy Giuliani pounced, accusing Dr. Paul of trying to blame America for the Sept. 11 attacks.

But Dr. Paul's point – lost on the demagogic New York mayor – was simply that America should rethink its role in Iraq and the region. "We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics," he said in the debate.

Who can doubt it today, given an Iraq war debacle conceived and executed by a president and an elite team blinded by ideology? The Iraq war did deep damage to our military, our economy and our prestige – and it has destroyed the Republican Party's credibility on national security issues.

Ron Paul, who has always stood against U.S. imperial overreach, was right about the Iraq war. And that's not the only thing he saw that most Republicans did not.

His libertarian economic views are far from mainstream. For example, he's against income taxes, period, and believes the U.S. should go back on the gold standard. Eccentricities like this keep him from being taken seriously.

But the truth is, if U.S. economic policy looked a lot more like Ron Paul's ideal than what we've had these past decades, the nation wouldn't be tottering on the financial abyss. Dr. Paul has long argued that an economy built on easy credit, insatiable consumption and deficit spending is a time bomb. He backs a national economic model based on savings, investment and production.

An economy that depends so heavily on government intervention to keep it afloat is one that creates of necessity an ever more powerful state. The nationalization of the banking sector only increases the power of the central government and decreases liberty. Dr. Paul warned for years against what we're seeing happen today. But nobody – including me – listened to the old crank.

How much better off would America be today if we had? We'll never know. Poor us.

It's not true, really, that nobody listened. Dr. Paul had a relatively small but intensely devoted following and raised astonishing amounts of campaign cash for his outsider presidential bid. Unfortunately, that enthusiasm didn't amount to much of anything in the primaries. So much for the Ron Paul Revolution, right?

Maybe not. The same GOP establishment that mocked and reviled Dr. Paul now lies shattered. Who believes in this Republican Party anymore? The party destroyed itself with its own unprincipled recklessness, both in foreign and fiscal policy. And it has ruined its reputation among the young – the most ardent of Dr. Paul's supporters, incidentally – who are far more likely to identify with the Democrats.

Out of this destruction, some creative young conservatives may rise up and decide to take back the Republican Party. Perhaps they'll run against the overweening power of the federal government and in favor of decentralizing power (but unlike today's Republicans, they'll actually mean it). Maybe they'll fight for an America that lives responsibly, within its natural limits both overseas and at home. And maybe, just maybe, they might make the Republican Party worth following again.

If that day comes, it will be thanks to the lifelong labors of Ron Paul and his 2008 campaign based on ideas. If those ideas germinate into genuine reform and restoration of sanity in our government, America will look back on Dr. Paul as a gift from Texas and a worthy nominee as Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year.

And having once given the nation George W. Bush – and given him to our countrymen good and hard – we Texans sure as hell owe them one.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I'm sorry, you voted for McCain, remember?

Thus the end to whatever cred you had.
Ron Paul was not running in the general election and was not a valid write-in candidate in my state.

End of my Cred? We'll I'll just get the fed to create about $500 billion in cred and have them give it to me.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
There is nothing to suggest Paul would've energized the Republican base to go out and vote for him in even the numbers McCain received.

Paul lost the primaries largely because he wasn't a Republican and party voters could see it.
If by Republican you mean war-mongering, big spending neo-con, then yes.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
Isn't Ron Paul that guy who rceived about 6% of the votes in the primaries?

I seem to recall the guy I voted for Third Party in 1992 getting 20 million votes.
I lol'd at your sig.

So, how does it feel knowing that you voted for a guy in favor of the AWB during the primaries?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 · (Edited)
And seeing how Huckabee stood less of a chance against Obama than Romney...really good..

And seeing how Romney had a higher NRA grade than McCain...really good
HAHAHA So this is your justification? You really didn't know he was anti-gun, did you? You let the NRA do your thinking. Perfect example of how SHEEP vote.

We've been over this before, if Nancy Pelosi gave the NRA $40 million they'd give her an A+ rating and an award.

Romney has only been in the NRA since August of 2006. How ironic, a man who has been anti-gun his whole life suddenly has a change of heart, just before he runs for President. No, there is nothing fishy there, not at all. :rolleyes:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #41 ·
MamasBoy,
Nopers, as I posted before, McCain had the worst NRA rating and history of voting RKBA between the candidates of McCain, Huckabee, and Romney.

Was a choice between Huckabee and Romney for me, and Huckabee's religious intolerance was going to be a problem for voters.

I'm a fan of Reagan, and I didn't care for his view on assault weapons either, but Romney would have had to moderated his views.

Of course, if I really wanted to look foolish, I'd have endorsed Ron Paul after he received 6% of the votes in the primaries. :)

As we all know, the NRA does a tremendous amount of good for our rights, and even helps sponsor gun safety classes so young shooters don't learn to handle a firearm as you do in this video and others:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0Y37KV2IG8
You still voted for someone who is in favor of the AWB and you didn't know it.

You're quite the typical voter; uniformed yet eager to vote.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
MamasBoy,
Oh my God, when I see a man-child who still lives at home with mommy and daddy talk about "uniformed" (did you mean "uninformed?") voters with about 30 years experiance, it pretty well sums you up in a nutshell.
I am still laughing.

Your little needle is kind of stuck in that groove, huh? :)
The problem you have is you're seeing life from mommy and daddy's house, and no prior experiance in voting, and even continue to talk about Ron Paul. :)

Nope, I was aware of McCain's, Romney's, and Huckabee's stand on gun issues.

He's still in denial. I think its from the shock of finding out that he voted for someone who is anti-RKBA.

Or if he knew before hand, as he insists, then he willingly voted for someone who is against gun rights.

I...on the other hand, voted for someone who would probably dispose of the ATF. And he calls me and others anti-gun? Bitch please.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,503 Posts
Discussion Starter · #45 ·
Mauserboy, I thought I read a while back that you voted for McCain?
In the general election yes. Under NC voting laws/regulations, Ron Paul was not a valid right-in candidate.

However I voted for him in the primaries.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top