Quote from: Shooterman on December 17, 2012, 07:13:14 AM
Oh, Here we go with the anti-Semitic nonsense again.

Just to be clear - I am not suggesting that is your motivation, which I understand is hands-off equal opportunity for all.  My comment pertaining to some of the Ron Paul supporters, specifically Ron Paul, goes back to what he wrote in the 1990s.  I know there were denials and that the claims were made by a disgruntled ex-aid and that Paul did not write or see what went out under his name, but I don't believe it.  As far as anti-Semitism from the left, it has been noted from many.  I think this article is notable, especially coming from a left-wing site:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/valerie-tarico/sophisticated-liberal-jew_b_191135.html

Quote from: USAPatriot on December 17, 2012, 08:06:23 AM
Just to be clear - I am not suggesting that is your motivation, which I understand is hands-off equal opportunity for all.  My comment pertaining to some of the Ron Paul supporters, specifically Ron Paul, goes back to what he wrote in the 1990s.  I know there were denials and that the claims were made by a disgruntled ex-aid and that Paul did not write or see what went out under his name, but I don't believe it.  As far as anti-Semitism from the left, it has been noted from many.  I think this article is notable, especially coming from a left-wing site:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/valerie-tarico/sophisticated-liberal-jew_b_191135.html

Ron Paul makes a lot of sense when it comes to some aspects of domestic policy - his desire for smaller government and state's rights is spot on. Additionally, Congressman Paul makes a strong case for changing the status-quo as it relates to the federal reserve - an independent board which has made decisions for the economy. But, Congressman Paul's opposition to capital punishment and his son's comments that "if it isn't violent, it shouldn't be considered a crime" show a flaw in the libertarian philosophy, of which I am a partial subscriber to. The federal government, other than the partial-birth abortion ban and DOMA, need to stay out of issues best left to states and the people.

Where Congressman Paul is wrong is on foreign affairs. The notion that American intervention is the root cause of our foreign policy problems is insulting and not based on fact nor common sense. Congressman Paul and his supporters fail to realize that America did not start this war. We are fighting a group of radical islamic savages, they do not value human life and are really a bunch of cavemen savages. The way to defeat this enemy is through a strong, well-equipped military, a network of human intelligence, a secure homeland, strong alliances with our allies, missile defense systems, and allowing law enforcement here at home to do their job. Sadly, Congressman Paul and his supporters have opposed the policies, but in place by Ronald Reagan and later George W. Bush, that have enabled us to fight the enemy.

Quote from: njdudeabides on December 17, 2012, 08:18:25 AM
Ron Paul makes a lot of sense when it comes to some aspects of domestic policy - his desire for smaller government and state's rights is spot on. Additionally, Congressman Paul makes a strong case for changing the status-quo as it relates to the federal reserve - an independent board which has made decisions for the economy. But, Congressman Paul's opposition to capital punishment and his son's comments that "if it isn't violent, it shouldn't be considered a crime" show a flaw in the libertarian philosophy, of which I am a partial subscriber to. The federal government, other than the partial-birth abortion ban and DOMA, need to stay out of issues best left to states and the people.

Where Congressman Paul is wrong is on foreign affairs. The notion that American intervention is the root cause of our foreign policy problems is insulting and not based on fact nor common sense. Congressman Paul and his supporters fail to realize that America did not start this war. We are fighting a group of radical islamic savages, they do not value human life and are really a bunch of cavemen savages. The way to defeat this enemy is through a strong, well-equipped military, a network of human intelligence, a secure homeland, strong alliances with our allies, missile defense systems, and allowing law enforcement here at home to do their job. Sadly, Congressman Paul and his supporters have opposed the policies, but in place by Ronald Reagan and later George W. Bush, that have enabled us to fight the enemy.

Agree.  Just to elaborate on the foreign policy question on US intervention - many agree that the US cannot be the world's policeman, intervening in every conflict.  But does it go too far if we choose to stay uninvolved with mass genocide when we are aware of the facts?  That point was part of the Ron Paul debate, and this link provides one view of that:   http://www.theamericanconservative.com/would-ron-paul-have-stopped-the-holocaust/  We can fall back to a "safe" position saying we can participate if there is some world body such as the UN that sanctions intervention, but we know that is a sham because the UN is paralyzed by Russian and Chinese vetos.

Quote from: USAPatriot on December 17, 2012, 08:06:23 AM
Just to be clear - I am not suggesting that is your motivation, which I understand is hands-off equal opportunity for all.  My comment pertaining to some of the Ron Paul supporters, specifically Ron Paul, goes back to what he wrote in the 1990s.  I know there were denials and that the claims were made by a disgruntled ex-aid and that Paul did not write or see what went out under his name, but I don't believe it.  As far as anti-Semitism from the left, it has been noted from many.  I think this article is notable, especially coming from a left-wing site:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/valerie-tarico/sophisticated-liberal-jew_b_191135.html

So, let me see if I understand this. Ron Paul, whether he was a racist ( I contend that in some form or another, most of us are ) anti-Semite, or had letters or articles under his byline go out, all of this over twenty years ago, somehow he is a lesser man, unworthy to speak out and be elected President, but other men, considerably more hypocritical than Paul, thinking primarily of Romney and a few others that castigated Paul, get a pass and are considered absolutely wonderful. I call BS. Whether Paul is or isn't an anti-Semite, I would recommend, that not another SOB in the last hundred years has advocated restraining big government, as much as he. Oh, the talk is always and has always been made, but the actual governance has always been something entirely different. Supposing Paul is a racist- the truth of the matter is I don't really give a big fokk. My entire interest is in preserving the remnants of America, and returning us to the foundations we were established on. That will not be done by continuing the status quo, whether by DIMS or PUBS, and so far, for the last 150 years, that is basically what we have had.

As someone that grew up in a racist society, and at times has been overcome with stupidity by saying certain things, and because I have fought my own inclinations and by doing so, has hopefully left my racist roots behind, I would rather have a dyed in the wool 110% racists that will restore constitutional principles to governing, than a million unprincipled ass holes that may not be racist, ( in public ) but will continue to fokk us over and send us into oblivion. If that makes me a bad person, as Great Grand Pap Simeon may have said 'Say Levies' Let it be what it will be. 

With all of that said, I will continue to harp on this; forget the emotional arguments, show me the constitutional authority for foreign aid, going forth into the world and remaking it in our image, and spending untold trillions of dollars, and young American lives in the process.

Many years ago, there was a song that expressed what I consider apropos to the situation.

THE WORLD WILL BE THE SAME, YOU'RE NEVER GONNA CHANGE IT.