I will NOT vote for Ron Paul unless it is against Obamination!

[Lead Poison]

Straw poll my foot, I definitely do NOT share Ron Paul's views on "family values?"


"Unlikely Marriage: Ron Paul Courting Huckabee’s Family Values Voters
By Austin Cassidy on May 31, 2011

Paul’s libertarian views seem like an unlikely fit for the Huckabee crowd.

The Congressman opposes all federal efforts to define marriage, whether defined as a union between one man and one woman, or defined as including anything else as well. He believes that recognizing or legislating marriages should be left to the states. However, in a 2007 interview, Paul stated that he supported the right of gay couples to marry, so long as they didn’t “impose” their relationship on anyone else.

Surprisingly, Paul did manage to secure the recent endorsement of Iowa state representative Glen Massie, whose signature issue has been attempting to impeach the four Iowa Supreme Court justices who helped pave the way for gay marriage in the Hawkeye state.

“It is a distinct privilege and honor to endorse Ron Paul for President of the United States,” said Massie. “I have admired Ron Paul for a number of years for being a principled statesman who has faithfully kept his word to uphold the Constitution of this great country.”

It is still hard for many to imagine the majority of conservative Iowa farmers and school teachers buying into the Texan’s longshot bid considering some of his less “family friendly” positions. During his last campaign for the White House, Paul repeatedly stated that prostitution should be legalized and that “marijuana prohibition” has failed and should be repealed."



Contrary to what Paul claims, you can clearly see that he does NOT support Christian family values the way he should support them!

The only way I would ever vote for Ron Paul is if he won the nomination. However, I will NOT vote for him in the primary.

As much as I dislike Ron Paul, I dislike socialist, radical muslim loving, Israeli hater Barack Obama even more!

Ron Paul's foreign policy would also be a total nightmare!

[dukkillr]

You knew it was only a matter of time before he ran afoul of the Theocracy crowd right?  It just makes me like him more.  All that worrying about individual freedom...  What was he thinking?  Give me a group of fundamentalists who want to codify their religious beliefs!

[magooch]

Well, Ron Paul at his core is a libertarian, but for the sake of this country, I am glad that he has chosen to run as a Republican.  That is not necessarily an endorsement, but recognition of the reality of what I believe could be a disaster if Ron Paul were to go third party and help the obamanation prevail.

[gypsyman]

Total freedom scare's alot of people. Including me. gypsyman

[rio grande]

And which candidate do you agree 100% with, Lead Poison?

I've always wrassled with libertarians, and they have bad-mouthed me at times something fierce.
But I like Ron Paul, even if I don't agree with all his positions.

I believe he is an honest man, who supports ALL of the U.S. Constitution.
He  could help us get out of this financial mess that's ruining the country, and end the wasteful, unnecessary and counterproductive wars overseas.
He would shrink the Federal Government and give the proper powers back to the individual states.
 
So what if he would allow states to decide if gays could marry or not? Same with marijuana - I don't care. You are going to control what consenting folks do in private?  Sure, you are.
And how's that 'drug war' working for you? We're winning, right?

At least with a 'State's Rights' country you could move to a state which is run the way you and others consider  best.
Try that now.  The Federal Gov. admits very few limits to it's total power. It uniformly and consistently crushes the will of the individual states and the people who live in them.

BTW, I've always thought gays should be allowed to get married - then they could suffer like the rest of us.

[Doublebass73]

You knew it was only a matter of time before he ran afoul of the Theocracy crowd right?  It just makes me like him more.  All that worrying about individual freedom...  What was he thinking?  Give me a group of fundamentalists who want to codify their religious beliefs!

X2

Proof positive that the so called "real conservatives" don't really want a smaller government, they want a bigger government that will impose their own view of morality on the rest of the country and world.

[Sourdough]

Ron Paul does not stand a chance.  First off he is not a Republican.  Paul is a Libraterian, running on the Republican ticket.  even tho a lot of people liked him he made a dismal showing four years ago, and is doing the same thing this time.  Oh he may have a strong showing in one or two places, but he is not consistantly in the minds of most Republican voters.
 
And I say this as I am looking at his image on the top of this screen. 

[45-70.gov]

You knew it was only a matter of time before he ran afoul of the Theocracy crowd right?  It just makes me like him more.  All that worrying about individual freedom...  What was he thinking?  Give me a group of fundamentalists who want to codify their religious beliefs!

.
DITTO...!....TM7

another ditto


what is wrong with the republican party
is they have distanced themselves from the libertarians toooo far
then damocrats want you to toe one line
then republicans  just want you to  toe another line
the libertarians  want you to draw you own line
as long as it doesn't cross some one elses line




right  now.......i am torn between  cain  and  paul


get involved in the republican primaries
then cast your anti-democrat vote in the general election
NO OTHER PARTY HAS A CHANCE........sad  but true.......but  what if.........BS

[dukkillr]

then damocrats want you to toe one line
then republicans  just want you to  toe another line
the libertarians  want you to draw you own line
as long as it doesn't cross some one elses line

Nicely said.

[ironglow]

  Ron Paul is a libertarian, espousing Libertarian views..  Traditional/cultural values mean little to libertarians, don't look for anything more
   
  His backers claim his wonderful "constitutional" stances, but of course there are candidates who have just as strong a stance concerning the constitution, but still  consider the values, tradition and customs that have made our country great.  Why settle for "half a loaf" ?
 
   I any case the choice is yours exclusively..that's what's good about America..

[BUGEYE]

Total freedom scare's alot of people. Including me. gypsyman

not me, when I was young, I thought I was totally free until I started voting and learned the truth.

[BUGEYE]

  Ron Paul is a libertarian, espousing Libertarian views..  Traditional/cultural values mean little to libertarians, don't look for anything more
   
  His backers claim his wonderful "constitutional" stances, but of course there are candidates who have just as strong a stance concerning the constitution, but still  consider the values, tradition and customs that have made our country great.  Why settle for "half a loaf" ?
 
   I any case the choice is yours exclusively..that's what's good about America..

I want to see a Newt/Herman  or  a Herman/newt ticket.   they're the only ones to really address the issues.  the rest of them are squabbling like a bunch of old women.

[nw_hunter]

Ron Paul does not stand a chance.  First off he is not a Republican.  Paul is a Libraterian, running on the Republican ticket.  even tho a lot of people liked him he made a dismal showing four years ago, and is doing the same thing this time.  Oh he may have a strong showing in one or two places, but he is not consistantly in the minds of most Republican voters.
 
And I say this as I am looking at his image on the top of this screen.

If Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance, then America is doomed as a free Republic.
Paul IS a Republican! A Republican of the Barry Goldwater era.(True Conservative)

Paul didn't make a dismal showing! He made a a great showing. The dismal showing was at the polls by sheeple led by the GOP to elect another LIBERAL REPUBLICAN AKA John McCain. You know the results............One that admitted to being Liberal won instead, and by the looks of things, the same will happen in 2012. Either way, we end up with a LIBERAL!

[Graybeard]

What many don't seem to get is that it is either Ron Paul or four more years of the same crap that has put us where we are now.

[Doublebass73]

  His backers claim his wonderful "constitutional" stances, but of course there are candidates who have just as strong a stance concerning the constitution, but still  consider the values, tradition and customs that have made our country great.  Why settle for "half a loaf" ?

Other than Ron Paul all I see running for the Republican nomination is the typical socially conservative/fiscally liberal big government candidates who could care less about the Constitution. Fill us in on who these "candidates" that you mentioned are.

[nw_hunter]

What many don't seem to get is that it is either Ron Paul or four more years of the same crap that has put us where we are now.

Only deeper in the hole. And from the looks of things, that is exactly what will happen.
I think we will see a change at the helm, but only in the shade of the skin. I don't think Obama will get the disgruntled white Republican vote that put him over the top last time.Even some of my Democrat friends are not happy with their last choice, and some of them will swing to a Liberal Republican like Mitt!

I see Mitt as the new Sheeple herder!

[BUGEYE]

I am a mainly a two issue voter. abortion and gun control.  I'm afraid RP would just hand off these issues to the states, which would be fine for us here in the south, but the folks in the northeast and all three states on the left coast would be screwed.
and, we are not SHEEPLE (NW) we are americans.

[saddlebum]

"Paul didn't make a dismal showing! He made a a great showing."
Thats just denial in it's purest form right there.
 
I agree with Lead Poison completely. Wondering what Paul will say about the recent "Iranian lead" terror plot that was foiled....."Ah heck, they was just foolin around. They have a right."
 
I truely believe that a Paul presidency could possibly be as disasterous for America as four more of Obama. Maybe even worse................
 
If I have to vote for Paul over Obama, I will be praying that congress can keep him reined in on the goofy stuff and support him on the good economy ideas he has. But I really don't think I'll have to make that vote. I'm sure we will see a similar "showing" from him this time as last time....... And the time before that..........

[ironglow]

  His backers claim his wonderful "constitutional" stances, but of course there are candidates who have just as strong a stance concerning the constitution, but still  consider the values, tradition and customs that have made our country great.  Why settle for "half a loaf" ?

Other than Ron Paul all I see running for the Republican nomination is the typical socially conservative/fiscally liberal big government candidates who could care less about the Constitution. Fill us in on who these "candidates" that you mentioned are.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
  For starters. Bugeye mentioned a couple possibilities Newt/Cain or Cain/Newt... You want smaller govt ?..Cain is the leading Tea Pary candidate and we know that is the aim of the Tea Party...  You want smaller govt ?  ..Newt has already said he would fire all 32 "czars" on his first day in office.  Both will eliminate many of the useless beaurocracies entrenched in DC.  Cain even said he would replace the EPA officers with people who have been abused by the EPA.
   They are not alone...  Yes of course, Ron Paul would be miles ahead of BHO..but so would Perry, Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman and even Johnson.
   Libertarians are bacically 'fiscal' conservatives...only those who embrace fiscal and cultural conservatism...are FULL conservatives (IMO).
  I doubt there are great numbers of true conservatives who want homosexual marriage (or animal/human marriage either), wide open dope smoking, the continuing holocaust of abortion (isn't 50,000,000 dead, enough by now?)...
 
   ..As far as foreign policy, the notion of "jump in bed and cover up your head" was tried by the US in the 1930s..  The spread of Nazism and an incident at Pearl Harbor.. brought that to a screeching halt..
   
  BTW:  If we were to 'ignore' Iran as Paul suggests...would those guys caught in an attempt to bomb embassies and the Saudi ambassador, have been able to actually pull it off ?  Perhaps a new "Pearl Harbor incident"  ?

[jimster]

The Congressman opposes all federal efforts to define marriage, whether defined as a union between one man and one woman, or defined as including anything else as well.

I don't see what's wrong with this...I actually oppose all federal efforts...period.  Would solve a lot of problems and save a lot of money.

I am a mainly a two issue voter. abortion and gun control.  I'm afraid RP would just hand off these issues to the states, which would be fine for us here in the south, but the folks in the northeast and all three states on the left coast would be screwed.

Sounds like some need to get their states under control?  Maybe some states deserve to be screwed?  If the Feds have power over the states they all could be screwed at once. 
 
I guess I'm not into this fed control thing at all, in my opinion anyone who thinks the feds should have power over the states are not conservative at all.  This is a power you can't reverse easily, and you can't guarantee that "your" guys policy in the White House will last any longer than his term...then you are in deep doo-doo. Better in my opinion for a handfull of states to be screwed by themselves and because of themselves,  than all of them at once.  At least people will have a place to go and a few options.
You can be against abortion and for gun rights without giving a thing to the feds and no laws being handed down by them either way.  I think we are all better off with the feds being very small and very quiet...if that's even possible now.
 
 
 

[gypsyman]

If it came down to Paul or Obama, it would definitly be Paul. But his view points on drugs,foreign affairs, would scare me. It's way to late in the game to take an isolatationist stand on world affairs. And, anything other than the legalization of pot, would put shivers down my spine, driving down the road. Drunk drivers, and pot smokers are bad enough. Don't need drivers on LSD or PCP. Probably plenty on crack now too. Time will tell. gypsyman

[BUGEYE]

jimster said

You can be against abortion and for gun rights without giving a thing to the feds and no laws being handed down by them either way.  I think we are all better off with the feds being very small and very quiet...if that's even possible now.

I said
I will never give up the fight to protect the unborn and if that's FED so be it.
they deserve nothing less.

[nw_hunter]

I am a mainly a two issue voter. abortion and gun control.  I'm afraid RP would just hand off these issues to the states, which would be fine for us here in the south, but the folks in the northeast and all three states on the left coast would be screwed.
and, we are not SHEEPLE (NW) we are americans.

I'm sorry! My mistake............I should have said American Sheeple I didn't name anyone on the forum as sheeple.

I'm against abortion! So is Ron Paul. He has stated as a Doctor he has delivered many, many babies! He has never aborted one. He is a STAUNCH defender of the right to keep and bear arms.
Look up his record on it! I guess believing in the Constitution and wanting to return the country to it's principals, is the thinking of a NUT CASE. Count me in! I like the company.

By the way! I'm one of those poor souls living in one of the three left coast states. You might be surprised how many here are starting to see the folly of politics as usual with the two headed snake system. Besides! I could hop across the border into Idaho or Montana if need be

[nomosendero]

You knew it was only a matter of time before he ran afoul of the Theocracy crowd right?  It just makes me like him more.  All that worrying about individual freedom...  What was he thinking?  Give me a group of fundamentalists who want to codify their religious beliefs!

Yes
However, as you have stated before he makes enough wierd statements to knock himself out of the running. I believe he has peaked yet again, but we shall see.
I sure like alot of his economic ideas thou.

[BUGEYE]

nw said



I'm sorry! My mistake............I should have said American Sheeple I didn't name anyone on the forum as sheeple.

uh, you are implying by your posts that people who don't worship at the feet of ron paul are sheeple to be led to slaughter.

if I say that ron paul supporters are lemmings being lured off the cliff, the only thing that saves me from an accusation of flaming is your sheeple remark.
Truce ?  I won't call RP people lemmings if you'll drop the sheeple label.

[billy_56081]

I'll vote for Ron Paul, won't vopte for Romney.

[nomosendero]

I'll vote for Ron Paul, won't vopte for Romney.

I agree about Romney, I won't vote for him. Sadly, I am not behind any of them yet.

[nw_hunter]

nw said



I'm sorry! My mistake............I should have said American Sheeple I didn't name anyone on the forum as sheeple.

uh, you are implying by your posts that people who don't worship at the feet of ron paul are sheeple to be led to slaughter.

if I say that ron paul supporters are lemmings being lured off the cliff, the only thing that saves me from an accusation of flaming is your sheeple remark.
Truce ?  I won't call RP people lemmings if you'll drop the sheeple label.

You have a right to your opinion. So do I! I was speaking in general of people who are duped by the mainstream media as sheeple. I don't believe in worshiping at the feet of anyone earthly.

I use Sheeple as an example of following blindly.............If you want to use lemmings, I'm not bothered by it. 

[45-70.gov]

LISTEN TO THIS
get an idea  of how  important this next election  is
i think  paul would be good...CAIN BE  GOOD
O'ROMNEE.........might  just make  socialism  bi-partisen
and spell the end of the republican party
but   ANY ONE other than  THE OBAMINATION





lemmings are mentioned in the comments below the video


http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=1CLfP5u3_JA

[Cabin4]

Paul is the only one out of the crowd that I can fully support. I'll settle for less if thats what come of this becasue anything is better the disaster in the WH.