The Heated Conservative - Tucson's Paul Revere
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
AmericanThinker: Trump beats New York Times 2-1 http://bit.ly/fGZ2fX
MarkLevinShow: The Charlie Sheen Republicans. Jeff Lord is Dead on!
AmericanThinker: Lindsey Graham: The Lil Metrosexual That Could http://bit.l
AmericanThinker:President Donald Trump? I Think Not! http://bit.ly/eo79
AmericanThinker: http://bit.ly/eVlJE
This message has been sent using the picture and Video service from Verizon Wireless!
To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.
Note: To play video messages sent to email, Quicktime@ 6.5 or higher is required.
Alan Simpson is a Joke! This RINO Needs to Go Away & Stay Away!
Mark Levin says 'Trump is NOT the Real Deal!'
Saturday, April 2, 2011
MARK LEVIN IS RIGHT AND HIS CRITICS ARE WRONG ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION AND THE WAR POWERS ACT
Here’s are some Links to the YouTube Audio so You can hear EXACTLY what Mark Levin says about the War Power Act in HIS OWN WORDS. Then Decide Who is Right and Who is Wrong on the issue.
I Agree with Mark Levin when He talks about IF a War Needs to be Declared or Not. Decide for Yourself and hear what Mark has to say about it. Mark Levin "There has been some discussion about the war powers act." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OugMoPtu1M
Mark Levin's Lesson on the 1973 War Powers Resolution I Agree with Him on this Subject and think You should listen with an Open Mind about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmX41OX53lI
Mark Levin "One more time Declaration of War." Mark Clears the Air and Finally Answers Critics about Declaration of War issues. This is a Very GREAT Video!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1qfiNO3WsM&feature=relmfu
Mark Levin then also Pointed out a Few Interesting and Good Discussions on His Facebook and Twitter Social Networking Sites on the War Power Act. Please do take the time to read them over before making a final decision about which side You believe is more accurate or Constitutionally Correct.
Andrew McCarthy and Bill Burck of National Review Online seem to Agree with Mark Levin’s Point of View. What do You think?
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262940/we-do-declare-kathryn-jean-lopez?page=1
Then Mark Levin Released this Note on His Facebook and Twitter Social Networking Sites on Monday, March 28, 2011 at 5:08am Entitled “So much educating to do, so little time to do it.”
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/notes/mark-levin/so-much-educating-to-do-so-little-time-to-do-it/10150116640995946
Mark Levin Clearly Explains Further His Stated Position and it is Correct and Accurate!
“Why didn't the Framers explicitly require the president to seek approval from Congress before engaging in all acts of war, and enumerate such power in Congress? If they granted the president, as commander-in-chief, the power to only repel military acts against the nation without congressional authority, why did they not enumerate that? What of offensive military actions taken to prevent imminent threats? What of covert operations for that matter, or extended wars fought over decades but mostly through surrogates (such as the Cold War)? What must be declared and when?
-- I repeat, the Congress -- has funded every kind of military and covert operation -- untold numbers of them -- without issuing a formal declaration of war in the vast majority of cases. What stops it? It does not need permission or a request from a president to issue a formal proclamation. It issues proclamations about meaningless things all the time without being asked. The Constitution says Congress shall have the power "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water ..."
When members of Congress vote to fund these activities, they are giving their formal, official consent to the operations. More than voting to declare war, they are actually voting to fund war -- all kinds of war. Interestingly, in most of the cases in which Congress has formally declared -- which is World War II -- there was never any doubt that the president would use all possible military force to protect the nation, and Congress would fund it, even without any declarations. The declarations were not used as constitutional requisites for war, but to rally the nation and assert our resolve. But once Congress has funded a military operation, and it funds virtually all of them, it is undoubtedly helping to make war for without the funds there can be no war. Thus, in each instance, it is declaring war its support for the military actions
What of military operations launched by a president where the president uses funds already appropriated by Congress before the operations began, but which were approved for general national security purposes -- that is, where Congress has not actually voted on funding a particular operation? Without question Congress has the power to withhold appropriations or defund operations, if it can muster enough votes to overcome a presidential veto. Congress rarely does so, although most notably in ending the Vietnam War. Congress has the power to enforce its decisions by impeaching a president and removing him from office should he continue to prosecute military operations after it has formally acted to end them. Hence, comparisons between the president and a monarch are ridiculous. These are very powerful tools, should Congress decide to use them. However, even now, when the president has directed military operations in Libya, is Congress even considering cutting off funding? What about the Republican majority in the House? No. But there is no question that congressional authority respecting war powers is significant, which distinguishes our system from many, including a monarchy. But make no mistake, it is not significant enough for the neo-anarchists, who cherry-pick their way through history to promote a dogma.
"But Mark," asks the outlier professor, "here is my challenge to you. I want you to find me one Federalist, during the entire period in which the Constitution was pending, who argued that the president could launch non-defensive wars without consulting Congress. To make it easy on you, you may cite any Federalist speaking in any of the ratification conventions in any of the states, or in a public lecture, or in a newspaper article – whatever."
Consulting Congress? Now, notice how the outlier professor changes the subject. I've been at this now for the better part of a week. I've explained my position on radio, on Fox, and on this site. I think it is extremely wise for a president to consult with Congress (well, not all 535 members but members in leadership positions) before launching non-defensive military actions for both policy and political reasons. In fact, most presidents claim to have done so in one form or another respecting most military operations. I cannot imagine any Federalist would have argued against a president consulting with Congress. Why would they? But that was not the issue. Consulting Congress is a far cry from arguing that a president is required, as a constitutional requisite to military operations, to secure a declaration of war. So, the outlier professor would be misstating what I said and dodging the issue, apparently something he has been accused of before by another professor, Ronald Radosh http://hnn.us/articles/10493.html
You don't have to agree with Professor Radosh's views, but he raises a serious concern.
Anyway, there you have it folks. Either you are convinced or you are not. If not, then you have to conclude, as they do here, that Ronald Reagan was a neo-con, monarch, warmonger, or whatever. http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard54.html
I have to move on, but I am sure the Paulite dead-enders will carry on.
(By the way, Russell Kirk despised libertarians. I am not of the same mind in that regard. Some of my best friends are libertarians - just not of the neo-anarchist kind.)”
This still has Not Satisfied or Validated Mark Levin’s Critics so he went on to Expose some of the Main “Outliers” for Who they are and what their Agenda could be in this Post on on Monday, March 28, 2011 at 4:27am Properly Entitled “Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!”
“As you can see, this website attacks most conservatives - Here Meese, Scalia, Thomas, and even the Koch brothers (who are actually libertarians) in a single post. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/76465.html
Here John Bolton is accused of being a neo-conservative. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/31901.html Here they approvingly post a piece entitled Ronald Reagan, Warmonger. http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard54.html
Here they are taking on drunk driving laws. http://twitter.com/TheKingDude/status/15781636364828672
Here's a pearl about Rush accompanied with someone's history lesson. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/graham-d1.1.1.html
Here Tom Sowell is said not to live up to standard. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bothwell5.html
This, after only 10 minutes of painfully going through that site.
This is who Professor Thomas Woods is aligned with. It is a small cabal of kooks who promote a form of neo-anarchism claiming it as constitutional originalism. Wrong, wrong, wrong.”
Mark Levin is also back up again by other Legitimate and Established Conservative Sources like Dan Riehl of Rieho World View when he wrote this Article over this “Controversy” on Tuesday, March 29th, 2011 Entitled “LCR's Thomas Woods Has A Charlie Sheen Woody But, Alas, No Goddesses”
In this Article Dan Riehl Writes:
“Poor Thomas Woods, this posting of his at LCR might explain how he went from being educated at Harvard (B.A.) and Columbia (Ph.D) to holding court at a junior college.
UPDATE: Another friend writes, “Just finished an attempt at offering Levin a debate against you regarding war powers. I am now blocked from the page. What a bunch of pathetic 3 year olds. Tom Woods=WINNING!”
There's nothing wrong with junior colleges per se - I attended one before moving on; however, they can become home to a certain class of would be academic that prefers circle jerks, to intelligent discourse. And they do seem to have quite a circle jerk going on just now over at this Lew Rockwell's place, when not defending "young radio star with the huge websites," Alex Jones. Starting to get the picture of what these mopes are all about? - to the extent even they know, of course. Oh well, what would the Right be without its own speshul version of Looney Tunes to occasionally entertain us out here?
A friend writes: “Levin is in full ‘damage-control’ mode on Facebook! He’s deleting every post about you as fast as he can!” That includes quotations about war powers from such left-wing subversives as George Washington. (Yes, his followers, who were not allowed to see my challenge to Levin, think I must be on the Left.)
To follow up on something from Mark Levin, this Woods does seem to have a knack for embarassing himself - including instances of significant intellectual dishonesty.
I'm embarrassed for Woods. He knows I know he's a propagandist on this issue. His misuse of the Constitutional Convention, the Federalist Papers, and other quotes here and there is politically expedient. There's nothing scholarly about it.
But then, what would one expect from a cartoon, or perhaps a caricature? The debate is over the Constitution and the War Powers Act. Redstate split the baby and just linked to Levin without mentioning Woods to make it clear where they stood. But even that didn't go un-noticed over at LCR. Disagree with them and you're nothing but a warmongering neo-con. Interesting how times have changed. At least they aren't still just calling everyone a Jew, or some such, while accusing you of both running and destroying America.
Or, perhaps it's the Confederacy they actually still embrace.
Would Sarkozy Have Supported the Confederacy? “Peaceful Southern citizens who are only asking to choose their own destiny are in danger of dying,” French president Sarkozy said. Oh, sorry, he actually said “Libyan citizens.”
It's hard to tell with this group. You can have a look by scrolling if you wish. Woods claims he sent Levin home crying; others chime in that John Yoo and the Claremont Institute - just so many more neo-cons; visit "the 51st state, or new Iowa - Israel like Huckabee or Palin and you're on haj - oh, they are clever this group. The Koch brothers? Just more neo-cons sneaking around under their beds, of course. But no matter, Woods and his mouth-foamed friends are #Winning because they told us so.
Sorry for the diversion from more serious things. But every couple years, or so, one gets an urge to peel the scab off the festering sore of this, or that wing of politics other than the hard Left and take a look at the pus. Chalk it up as a human frailty. Just don't look too long, diseased portions of anything can make one rather sick.”
And Here’s How I Feel about the Critics of Mark
“Mark Levin is a Busy Man in the FIGHT Against TYRANNY. He's TOO Busy ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING FIGHTING BACK AGAINST TYRANNY instead of sitting on the Sidelines taking Potshots at a Respected Conservative Talk Radio Show. That was My Point from above. The Judge, Ron Paul and Tom Woods are NOT doing ANYTHING Effective at Combating Tyranny but MARK LEVIN IS!! His Landmark Legal Foundation is Fighting the NEA: http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopDefault.aspx The Same Landmark Legal Foundation is in the Fight Against ObamaCare that is Currently Winning & on it's way to circuit Court on appeal: http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads/Landmark%20Legal%20-%20Brief%20Filed.pdf
And Mark Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation is also doing it's BEST to Help & Assist AZ in it's Fight to Enforce SB1070 in which Eric Holder is Still doing HIS Absolute Best to Stop it: http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads/AmicusBrief_PI_Appeal.pdf
My Point again IS Mark Levin is NOT just Style OVER Substance. Mark's NOT All Talk with NO Action. Mark Levin Walks the Walk and Talks the Talk.”
Furthermore:
The Judge, Mike Church, Ron Paul and Tom Woods are NOT a Better or More Accurate Authority on the Constitution or the Supreme Court than Mark Levin. Not even Close. Mark Levin has Written TWO Best Selling Books on the Supreme Court and the Constitution. Maybe You've ...heard of them? MEN IN BLACK and LBERTY AND TYRANNY? Sound Familiar? Ring any Bells? Mark Levin is a Constitutional lawyer, president of the the prestigious Landmark Legal Foundation in Washington D.C. AND Also, the former Chief of Staff for Attorney General Edwin Meese during the Reagan Administration. Beginning in 1981, Mark R. Levin served as advisor to several members of President Ronald Reagan's Cabinet, eventually becoming Associate Director of Presidential Personnel and ultimately Chief of Staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese; Levin also served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education at the U.S. Department of Education, and Deputy Solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Mark Levin's Show is Aired Daily (Monday through Friday) with over 8.5 Million Loyal Listeners.
My Point is The Judge, Mike Church, Ron Paul and Tom Woods has Nothing on Mark Levin. They're NOT in the Same League. The Critics do NOT have the Conservative background or Impact that Mark Levin does. Not to mention, Mark Levin is NOT just Talk but He also is Helping AZ fight Eric Holder off over SB1070, Helping Fight back Against ObamaCare and taking on the NEA. Not to mention all of the "Mark Levin Surges" He's done on His Radio Show which have helped Raise Awareness on Important issues when it was Neccessary and Needed. Mark Levin is a Patriot and Should Not be Attacked or Critisized by the likes of Judge Napolitano, Mike Church, Ron Paul and Thomas Woods.
What have these Critics EVER Done anywhere Near those Accomplishments?
THEY ARE NOT RIGHT on this Issue!
THEY ARE WRONG. Sorry!
Mark Levin Knows His Stuff and He's RIGHT on this Issue. Deal with it!
The Judge, Mike Church, Ron Paul and Tom Woods are WRONG and You're Not going to change My Mind about it. I've read BOTH SIDES of the issue and I SIDE WITH MARK LEVIN! Case Closed!”
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Why Conservatives Won't Support or Vote for Representative Ron Paul for President EVER!
I would like to start this Blog off by saying some things that are Nice and Great about Ron Paul so the Ron Paul Supporters can't attack me for saying NOTHING Nice about him.
Here is What We Know about Ron Paul:
Ronald Ernest “Ron” Paul (born 20 August, 1935) is a paleolibertarian 10th-term Congressman, a former Air Force Flight Surgeon, a medical doctor (M.D.) and a 2008 presidential candidate from the U.S. state of Texas. As a Republican, he has represented Texas's 14th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1997, and had previously served as the representative from Texas's 22nd district in 1976 and from 1979 to 1985.
Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have seventeen grandchildren. Ron Paul is a Baptist.
In Congress Ron Paul has proposed doing away with personal income taxes, federal antitrust laws and the minimum wage. He advocated pulling the United States out of the United Nations, NATO and the International Monetary Fund. Republicans ignore him; most of his bills fail to attract a single co-sponsor.
However in 2009 he has attracted over 300 votes for his bipartisan proposal to subject the Federal Reserve to unprecedented scrutiny by allowing the Government Accountability Office to audit all central bank operations, including its decisions on interest rates, lending to individual banks and transactions with foreign central banks. He has a separate bill to abolish the Fed altogether. (He is the lone sponsor.)
Paul is a pro-life states' rights libertarian, also known as a paleolibertarian. Paleolibertarians advocate a limited role of government, low taxes, free markets, strict construction of the U.S. Constitution, and a return to monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. He has earned the nickname "Dr. No" for voting against any bill he believes violates the Constitution.
Ron Paul is noted for his authorship of the We the People Act, an act which removed the ability of the US Supreme Court to hear cases involving discrimination based on sexual orientation or religion. He is also noted for submitting several bills banning abortion, and somewhat controversially was the only person to oppose the Darfur Divestment Act of 2007, a bill which disallowed the US government, corporations, and individuals from sending money to or doing business with the janjaweed rebel group of the Sudan.
Ron Paul's desire to secure U.S. borders remains a key topic in his 2008 presidential campaign. He opposes the North American Union proposition and its proposed integration of Mexico, the United States of America, and Canada. Paul voted "yes" on the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorizes the construction of an additional 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S and Mexico. Paul opposes illegal immigration as well as amnesty for illegal immigrants.
That's about Everything that is Actually GOOD about Ron Paul. Now I Must Show You the BAD SIDE of Ron Paul that His Loyal Supporters Don't want You to Know about:
Michelle Malkin Exposed Ron Paul for the "Truther" that HE REALLY IS!! Ron Paul's Own Words and on Video!!
Trutheriness and Ron Paul • May 19, 2007 11:08 AM
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/19/trutheriness-and-ron-paul/
Ron Paul is also ABSOLUTELY Racist and Anti-Semitic! Read this Blog and Decide for Yourself!
http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/01/09/ron-pauls-racist-newsletter-and-the-libertarians-that-excuse-it/
The neo-Nazi organization Stormfront also provided widgets on its internet site to enable people to electronically donate cash to Paul's campaign. Stormfront's founder, former Ku Klux Klan member Don Black, also gave financial support to Paul's campaign.
Ron Paul wants to "reinstate the Constitution and restore the Republic." He rejects a welfare state or nanny state role for the federal government, and advocates a strong non-interventionist foreign policy.
He voted against the Iraq War in 2002 and has offered alternatives such as granting the President authority to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and arming pilots. He is the only Republican presidential candidate to have voted against the Iraq War.
On March 5, 2008, Ron Paul was the only member of the house to vote against a bill "Condemning the ongoing Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, and for other purposes"
Ron Paul seemed to have dropped slightly in the polls that followed the second Republican debate in Columbia, South Carolina, to 25 percent. This was probably as a result of his suggestion that weekly bombing of Iraq following Operation Desert Fox in December 1998 may have contributed sufficiently to Arab anger at the United States as to make the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks inevitable. Paul was excoriated by Rudy Giuliani, who said that this was the most bizarre explanation for the attacks he had ever heard. Other Republican commentators sought to explain Paul's continued strength in post-debate polls as the result of multiple votes by his supporters or voting by non-Republicans. In response to Rudy Giuliani, the next day at the National Press Club, Ron Paul offered Rudy a book list to read regarding the issue of American foreign policy. These books are Imperial Hubris by Michael Scheuer, Dying to Win by Robert Pape, Blowback by Chalmers Johnson, and The 9-11 Commission Report by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks.
The Newest Updated Info on Ron Paul:
Ron Paul Is A Vicious Anti-Semite and Anti-American and Conservatives Need To Wash Their Hands of Him - by David Horowitz *Posted on February 17 2011 1:25 pm*
Long ago Bill Buckley drummed the anti-Semites out of the conservative movement, and the movement thrived as a result. But the Jew-haters have returned. For years the Texas crackpot, Ron Paul, has been attacking America and Israel as imperialist powers — the Great Satan and the Little Satan, and calling for America’s retreat from the battle against our totalitarian enemies. At the recent CPAC conference Paul’s Jew-hating storm-troopers swarmed the Freedom Center’s table to vent their spleen against Israel as a Nazi state. Now Paul is making a priority of withdrawing aid for Israel — the only democracy in the Middle East and the only reliable ally of the United States. Here is an alert from Gary Bauer about the amendment Ron Paul is proposing which may be voted on today.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
To: Friends & Supporters
From: Gary L. Bauer
Special Alert
Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) has just introduced an amendment to end all U.S. aid to Israel. The amendment could be voted on before the day is over. I need your help right now to stop this ill-conceived proposal!
Please click here to quickly and easily send a message to your elected representative urging them to stand with Israel.
Don’t be deceived. This Ron Paul proposal would not lower our budget deficit. By abandoning Israel while its enemies are gaining strength, the risk of a major war in the Middle East would increase. A major war would cost the U.S. billions and billions of dollars as we have already seen in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The U.S. gives billions of dollars a year to foreign countries that hate us and regularly vote against us at the United Nations. But, Israel votes with the U.S. 97% of the time. They are a loyal ally that shares our values. The aid they receive is used to buy military equipment from U.S. companies so the money comes back to us. Ron Paul’s proposal makes no sense.
Please right now go to http://www.cwfpac.com/ to tell your congressman to stand with Israel.
You may also call the Capitol Hill Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for your representative’s office. If you don’t know his or her name, give the operator your zip code and they will transfer you. Tell them to stand with our most reliable ally Israel by opposing the Paul amendment to end all foreign aid. Please take action now!
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/17/ron-paul-is-a-vicious-anti-semite-and-anti-american-and-conservatives-need-to-wash-their-hands-of-him/
Why I Don't Like Ron Paul by Politicons.net Posted March 2nd, 2011 9:13 AM by Henry D'Andrea
After releasing my Top 5 GOP frontrunners list for March, many Ron Paul supporters were very unhappy not seeing him in the top five. They left tons of comments complaining that I didn’t include him and saying he is the only true hope for 2012. As most of my regular readers know, I do not like Ron Paul, and I support Sarah Palin for President. So, to not seem biased, I wanted to tell you why I don’t like Ron Paul. However, not to leave you in the cold, in terms of 2012, if he were the Republican Nominee, I would support him.
First off, many Republicans are strongly pro-American defense, and Ron Paul is not just anti-war, but he has adopted some of the more obnoxious and inflammatory rhetoric from the Left about the war that is extremely grating. Hell, according to Paul, Iraq is a war for oil and empire, engineered by neocons, and in Paul’s book, we deserved to be attacked on 9/11. That is not Conservative at all, and quite frankly disgusting. I do not want the President of the United States with that mindset. Additionally, Paul’s inconsiderate, “we must leave immediately, regardless of the consequences,” position on Iraq comes across as poorly thought out. Even though Paul is opposed to the war, the disengaging of the United States from the war immediately and without consequences is very thoughtless. It’s something you might hear from a Liberal college student at an anti-war rally. Even President Obama and Secretary Clinton, all whom have spent months trying to convince America that they’re the most anti-war of all, have said we may be in Iraq for years to come, though Obama has set a date for withdraw.
Secondly, Paul wants to get rid of the CIA. Are you kidding me? The CIA is vital to our national security. Ron Paul believes that the CIA “runs everything.” He has also suggested in the past that the CIA has conducted a “coup” in America.
There’s been a coup, have you heard? It’s the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They’re the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries. … And of course the CIA is every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. … And yet think of the harm they have done since they were established after World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They’re in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators … We need to take out the CIA.
Well Mr. Paul, have you introduced any legislation to stop CIA funding, or demanded any hearings? No. Also, I think the military would laugh at the notion that they take orders from the CIA. They take orders from the President and are accountable to Congress. I know this, because I’m a rational American and not a conspiracy theorist.
To not continue on with my bashing of Ron Paul, I wanted to say one last point. For whatever reason, Ron Paul has more obnoxious supporters backing him than Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee combined. If you write a column or a post knocking: Palin, Romney, or Huckabee, you’ll certainly have some people disagreeing with you. However, If you knock Ron Paul, you’ll often have hordes of social misfits making obnoxious comments, spamming your polls, touting conspiracy theories, insulting conservatives in general, and doing everything possible to make nuisances of themselves. I can already guarantee, the first comment on this post will be totally slamming me and saying something like Ron Paul is for Liberty and he’s the best for 2012. If he is the best, why did he lose in 1988 and 2008?
In final, not to completely degrade Ron Paul, he is committed to a smaller government, slashing spending, liberty, and the Constitution. Which are all points I support. However, those few arguments I brought up lead me into not supporting him in a GOP primary. I know after saying this, I’ll get crap from his supporters, but if he decides to run in 2012, he’ll lose in the primary. Sure he can win every straw poll or online poll, but that’s because his support website’s completely bomb them with Paul supporters. In all truth, he should remain congressman of Texas’s 14th district.
http://politicons.net/why-i-dont-like-ron-paul/
Posted on February 17 2011 1:25 pm
Ron Paul makes Public Statements like these that are Anit-War that Conservatives Don't Agree with or believe:
http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=637609&keyword=&phrase=&contain
America has gone on to WIN the War in IRAQ and this is no longer an issue to the American people.
The IRAQ War did Not Bankrupt America's Economy. Domestic Discretionary Spending is what is Destroying America's Economy.
Here's another Public Statements like these that are Anit-War that Conservatives Don't Agree with or believe:
Perpetual war is expensive.
http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=633197&keyword=&phrase=&contain
Again, America has gone on to WIN the War in IRAQ and this is no longer an issue to the American people.
Many Conservatives DO NOT AGREE With Ron Paul on the Stated Issues Below:
Ron Paul Wants to Greatly Decrease Spending on Military Budgets exept for Pay for Active Duty and Armed Forces personnel training which He Would Support Slightly Increasing Spending in those two areas.
Ron Paul thinks America SHOULD have diplomatic relations with the government of Cuba.
Ron Paul says "No foreign aid is authorized in the Constitution."
Ron Paul Thinks The US should use military force only when the US border or territories are attacked or American citizens are in danger.
Ron Paul Thinks "The War on Drugs has failed. The Fed. gov should turn the responsibility over to the states."
Ron Paul Believes More in a Police State like the America nder Bill Clinton BEFORE 9/11. Ron Paul says about Terrorism "State law enforcement agencies should be more independent. Fed should have less jurisdiction."
Ron Paul Does NOT Support United States Military Action in Afghanistan.
I Found All of these Answers about Ron Paul at: http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=296
IF You Are NOT Interested in seeing Ron Paul in Youtube Videos, then You may want to skip this next middle section of this Blog down to the Bottom where I Give MY BOTTOM LINE!
I Do Enjoy Showing Videos and Other Great Articles/Posts Related to Ron Paul though!
Mark Levin's 5 million $ challenge to Ron Paul
This is a Challenge that Mark Levin KNOWS with NO DOUBTS that He’ll Never have to Pay because Ron Paul is Unbalanced and Unreliable. What Mark Levin says about the Founders being Conservatives was Right also. The Libertarians Hate that Fact but it is Fact from our History and You can’t Change or Re-Write History. It is what it is!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hv1_yMQtS0&feature=related
I happen to Agree with Mark Levin about Ron Paul in this Youtube Video.
Does that make Me a “NeoCon” like the Video says of Mark Levin with the Music of “True Colors” playing in the background?
Mark Levin: Ron Paul Should Not Be President, Palin Qualified To Be President
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRhhO7qrBcg
I Don't Like Ron Paul, Never Have and Never Will. Ron Paul had His Chance to Run for President back in 2008. I Believe Paul came in Dead Last in Each and Every Single STATE!! America Rejects Ron Paul and His Supporters are Rude, Obnoxious, UnCivil, Mean, Vile Malcontents! I'm Sick of Ron Paul and His Supporters.
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/17/ron-paul-is-a-vicious-anti-semite-and-anti-american-and-conservatives-need-to-wash-their-hands-of-him/
Ron Paul is not just anti-war, but he has adopted some of the more obnoxious and inflammatory rhetoric from the Left about the war that is extremely grating. Hell, according to Paul, Iraq is a war for oil and empire, engineered by neocons, and in Paul’s book, we deserved to be attacked on 9/11. That is not Conservative at all, and quite frankly disgusting.
In this Youtube Video Interview, Ron Paul can't Help but continue his message of Blame America for all of the problems in the middle east. Just watch how many Times Ron Paul says it's America's Falt int his Interview. This is Important because it's SO WRONG!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C756NOPyDA
This is another Youtube Video where Ron Paul goes off the rails and speaks incoherently about "Foreign Interventialism" Ron Paul Does NOT Want to Support Israel or Defend Israel. That's all there is to it.
The BIG Part that Ron Paul is Badly Missing is the Part where Israel NEEDS Our Help/Support and Israel WANTS Our Help/Support.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4Jn2xCF92Y
Ron Paul: Israel Encouraged and Started Hamas This Video Really Speaks for itself. Ron Paul in His Own Loony Words on Video. Undeniable!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFaSzU9XF5o
Ben Stein Accuses Ron Paul of Anti-Semitism on Larry King
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOV0qCW7nBA&feature=related
Terrorism: Ron Paul vs. Giuliani @ SC Debate - Ron Paul explains the damage that an interventionist policy can have when it comes to violent blowback.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD7dnFDdwu0&feature=related
Ron Paul on Gaza 1-3-09 These Youtube Videos are easy to find.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08gTWqWrI4M
Here are Youtube Videos of Ron Paul Expressing Exactly How He Feels about Legalizing Drugs. Ron Paul is Famous for and Well Known in the Younger College Age Crowd for His Stand Against Reagan's "War on Drug" and You Wonder why so Many Young People are flocking to Ron Paul?
Ron Paul debates war on drugs supporter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EFfE_hvC_c
Ron Paul vs Stephen Baldwin - Marijuana Fight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR-LUWHRzIo&feature=related
Ron Paul "War on Drugs "
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmBciOsNWHo&feature=related
Ron Paul on Drugs and Prostitution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypYBfvnwBTc
Arguements to legalize drugs and prostitution - This is what Many Libertarians Believe that Many Conservatives DON'T!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p88C3M1wqkE&feature=related
Ron Paul on Drug Legalization
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEhQepWZ3LA&feature=related
Ron Paul - War on Drugs a "Complete Failure"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvFYCky0muY&feature=fvwrel
Ron Paul on marijuana, prohibition, and personal freedom
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0GZznxMC14&feature=related
Here are some Youtube Videos of Ron Paul's Opinion about 9/11. You decide IF Ron Paul is a Truther or Not:
Ron Paul 10-17 on Alex Jones Show Infowars NWO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oDBYSkXLiA
Ron Paul talks about the Bilderberg Group
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plo-1rLZ3Jo&feature=related
Ron Paul on The Alex Jones Show"Opportunity for True Freedom in 2012!!"1/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=andtgH9Nflo&feature=related
Ron Paul: First Bush Was Working Towards New World Order
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8DpKKSmaa8&feature=related
Glenn Beck talks about NWO with Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nODyj8H68TA&feature=related
Ron Paul Bashes the New World Order at Rally in Nashville TN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDXHbgpoI80&feature=related
Ron Paul: The Deep Dark Details (2 of 2) -
The video the Paleoconservative "Libertarians" don't want you to see.
Ron Paul admits to writing the bigoted newsletters in 1996, claiming the quotes were being taken out of context:
http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d
Stormfront radio endorses Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBz_7yrJKq0
Ron Paul voted against the Rosa Parks medal and then lied to the public and said it was tax payer funded. Paul cosponsored the Boy Scouts Commemorative Coin Act, that would give $3,500,000 of the proceeds to a homophobic organization. Hypocrisy? To add to the BSCCA, Paul also attempted to introduce legislation to give every cold war veteran a gold medal. The cost of this? $240,000,000. And unlike the Rosa Parks medal, these medals actually would have been tax payer funded.
Rosa Parks medal of honor legislation:
http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2html.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffinancialse...
Boy Scout Commemorative Coin Act legisaltion: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5872&tab=summary
Cold War veterans medals legislation:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3417:
More on former KKK Grand Wizard Don Black endorsing Ron Paul:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22331091/
Tom G. Palmer article on Lew Rockwell and his creep racist cult:
http://tomgpalmer.com/2005/01/21/racism-and-bigotry-delivered-courtesy-of-lew...
Jamie Kirchick who broke the newsletter story on Tucker MSNBC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWpADkP4QqY
More info on National Socialist Randy Gray, Paul's former Midland Country Coordinator in Michigan: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/15/17443/1121/935/437394
Paul held a fundraiser for Bill Johnson, another one of Paul's White Supremacist friends; who he endorsed for the Los Angeles County Court. It turns out Johnson wanted to have all non whites deported from the US. "Coincidentally," Ron Paul wants to end birthright citizenship, therefore spitting on the Constitution he claims to admire. We all know the easiest way they scan immigrants! It's usually based on skin pigmentation.
More info on Ron Paul endorsing racial separatist Bill Johnson: http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2008/05/judicial-candid.html
More on Ron Paul wanting to end birthright citizenship: http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2007/11/ron_paul_drops_an_ant... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T-iJKwskH4
"Meet the Press" Tim Russert NBC interview where Paul says he would repeal the Civil Rights Act: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-iJP4BAAQ4
"Situation Room" Wolf Blitzer CNN interview regarding newsletters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKBlk1Vpeuw
Ron Paul voted NAY on MLK holiday:
http://wwsword.blogspot.com/2008/01/proof-ron-paul-voted-nay-to-mlk-day.html
Ron Paul's against the Civil Rights Act which ended state segregation of blacks: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html
Ron Paul's response to the newsletters becoming public in 1996:
http://reason.com/blog/show/124339.html
Paul only had four employees at his Texas Headquarters where the newsletters were distributed, and only seven others around the rest of the country:
http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:JR05RqhoRiEJ:www.reason.com/news/show/124...
Ron Paul and the homophobic We The People Act:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59ZaP9Akswo&feature=PlayList&p=03799F1...
"The Trouble With Forced Integration" by Ron Paul:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html
Various photocopied issues of Ron Paul's bigoted rants and conspiracy theories:
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/ron-paul-newsletter
Great video by Buddhagem on Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b61VR-GACMA
Ron Paul And His Rally For Racism And Terrorism!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnPqS1pKBjc
Proof Ron Paul is Racist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4pHcgjTngs
Ron Paul shows his true racist colors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAm2bDfnHaY&feature=related
OK I Think I've Shown Enough Proof about just HOW and WHY Conservatives Won't Support or Vote for Ron Paul for President. Not Now! NOT EVER!!
Bottom Line on Ron Paul:
Some Conservatives say they Agree with Him about 90% of the time and actually Like the Guy as a Person. I’m NOT One of those Conservatives. I Find Myself in Agreement with Ron Paul to be somewhere around 70% on Ron Paul’s Best Day.
Ron Paul is Who he hangs out with. Ron Paul is Fine with Associating Himself with Racists, Extremist and Anti-Semites. Even IF He’s NOT Any of those things Personally. The Rotten Apples DO Spoil Him because they’re Funding Him and Propping Him up as the Savior of America. What America? What kind of America Would that look like? IF the Saying is True about “You are Who You Hang out with” than Ron Paul Will Never be able to crawl out or Away from the Dark Shadow of Followers Who Support Him. Never. They’re Fanatics and Zealots of the Worst kind. He Refuses to distance himself from these people. That’s Morally and Ethnically Wrong in My Humble Opinion.
Ron Paul doesn’t have to accept Contributions or Endorsements from ANYONE or ANY GROUP that He’s Uncomfortable with or Disagrees with.
Has Ron Paul Openly and Publically Denounced ANY of the People or Organizations that I have Mentioned above? If so, When? Where did he do this? I’d Argue He hasn’t and He Won’t. Those are HIS PEOPLE. America Rejects Ron Paul’s People and Him.
One Final Point about Accepting/Rejecting Ron Paul as a President.
What may be Great and Passes as Acceptable as a Congressman/Senator or even Governor of a State is NOT the SAME Bar or Standard We Should use to Decide IF they are Solid Quality Presidential Candidates or NOT.
What May Work for Any State or District a Candidate May be representing is Definitely NOT the same as Representing ALL AMERICANS as President.
We Need to and MUST have Much Higher Standards that We Hold Presidential Candidates due to the Fact that Whoever Finally Wins the Nomination Will be Widely Considered the Most Powerful/Influential Person in the Modern Free World and the Added Responsibility of Commanding the World’s Most Powerful Military as Commander in Chief. This is NOT to be taken lightly!
It Requires a Well Rounded Candidate that has More Qualifications than just being a Good/Decent Congressman/Senator or Governor.
Executive Experience does count and makes a difference but it’s NOT Everything.
The Same can be said of Ideology/Philosophy.
My Presidential Candidate MUST be as Conservative as Possible meaning He/She MUST have Solid Conservative Principles, Values and Morals to Win My Support, Endorsement and Vote.
Ron Paul is Terribly lacking in some Key Areas that Conservatives Demand.
Without the Conservative Base behind Ron Paul, He can’t Win the Nomination or Against whatever Left Wing Radical Liberal Democrat that the Democrats all line up behind.
John McCain has taught America this Great Modern Day Lesson of Needing the Conservative Base of the Republican Party to WIN the Presidential General Election. And to do that, HE MUST be More Conservative which at this stage of His Life and Professional Career, He is Unwilling to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)