‘Crazy Uncle’ … or Defender of the Constitution … ???

Foreign Policy: Why this issue is Ron Paul’s strongest…

Posted by Kerodin on Monday, December 26, 2011

Establishment Republicans have become apoplectic over the potential for a Ron Paul victory.  They claim his Foreign Policy agenda will destroy America.  Translation: President Paul will throttle back the dollars going into the War Machine, and will take the most lucrative market off the table – the American Domestic market.

There are trillions on the table for defense companies in an America that focuses her bayonets inward.  Think VIPR Teams, scanners, armored vehicles for the Podunk Police Department, et cetera.

Ron Paul refuses to let that obtain.  He points to that troublesome document for support – the Constitution.

What the Republicans fear is genuine: Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy positions appeal to the Hard Right and they will appeal to the Hard Left in a General Election.

Ron Paul’s economic message appeals to an even broader coalition of Left & Right.

Here is the bullet-list of Foreign Policy positions directly from Ron Paul’s 2012 site:

  • * Make securing our borders the top national security priority.
  • * Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.
  • * Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.
  • * End the nation-building that is draining troop morale, increasing our debt, and sacrificing lives with no end in sight.
  • * Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.
  • * Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.
  • * Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.
  • * Revitalize the military for the 21stcentury by eliminating waste in a trillion-dollar military budget.
  • * Prevent the TSA from forcing Americans to either be groped or ogled just to travel on an airplane and ultimately abolish the unconstitutional agency.
  • * Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.

Ron Paul can be the next President of the United States with his message.

The only obstacle he faces is an Establishment R machine that will deliberately refuse to support his campaign against President Obama. 

For the Establishment, President Obama is better than a President Paul.

If you are not ready to step off the porch, if you think there remains a whisp of hope in the political sphere, do what you can to advance your ideals.

Here is Ron Paul’s official site.

Kerodin
III

      
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
21 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hans
Hans
9 years ago

I’m still a bit ambivalent when pressed about my opinions of Ron Paul.

I’m starting to believe that the ‘push-back’ against Paul is more a reaction to the fact that he is embraced by “those Anarchists’ (militant tools of the communists and progressives) than a result of a flaw in his policies.

When I hear Paul-bashing from folks I hear two things: (1) dislike of Alex Jones and the conspiracy-theorists, and (2) distrust of foreign policy free of entanglements and interventionism.

Since I learned to question the motives of ‘establishment Republicans’ and inspected the progressive influence on both parties R & D, I’ve evolved to accept that we Patriots (who wish to enhance Liberty through drastically reduced government) have more in common with the ‘true anarchists’ (who believe that man can experience Liberty in the absence of any government) than with “R”epublicans.

This was not a difficult realization for me as I always found the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation more energizing than the Constitution … the Anti-Federalist arguments more compelling than the Federalists.

Just one of my many and obvious character flaws …

Mark
9 years ago
Reply to  Hans

I hear a lot of “Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity said…”

Hans
Hans
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark

How very interesting, since those names were not mentioned in the post or in any of the comments I’ve read…

… and those names are rarely seen on NCRenegade.

The problem you experience may be either a hearing impairment or a thinking impediment.

I’ll let you ponder which might be the cause.

Bubba
9 years ago
Reply to  Hans

Easy Hans,
Mark didn’t provide context for the statement …. at all, so any assumptions on intention and rebuttal would also be out of context. eh?

Hans
Hans
9 years ago
Reply to  Bubba

‘s-ok, Bubba …

You are correct: no context AND no content; with a strong implication that I / we are merely parroting what we heard elsewhere.

As you have no tolerance for “LINO’s”, I have little tolerance for people who ‘snipe’ rather than engage in a substantive dialog.

I made no assumptions regarding Marks’ intent; I merely proposed two hypothesis that seem to fit the context-less and content-less comment.

Cheers.

DRenegade
Admin
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark

Mark,

Would you care to elaborate on this context of this comment since I am missing its point?

Good luck in your run for Alamance County Commissioner: hoppforalamance.com

Bubba
9 years ago

Hans,

When it comes to Ron Paul and his supporters I know no ambivalence. I know exactly what I think and feel about it.

I believe that his policy flaws are the very reason he is embraced by anarchists and communist tools … as well as raw anti-semites, racists, nazis and outright loonies.

You’re right about Paul-bashers dislike of Alex Jones. After all Jones is the king of the truther cult and dislike is putting it mildly. Trutherism is a symptom of the sickness that allows Americans to ignore the barbarisms of islam while blaming the victims and atrocities of islam on our own. Jones is one of those people I wouldnt allow in my yard, but Paul is a regular guest on Jones’ rabid show.

Belief in reduced government, or government that limits itself to the extents of it’s constitutional authorities and powers does not place me on common ground with ‘true anarchists’, because their goals if realized, can only create a vacuum that would be immediately filled by total chaos and communism. It’s not coincidence that the progressive’s angenda would result in the same.

There are few real Republicans left in politics, and even fewer real Democrats (if any). All we have left is the progressive socialists that call themselves Democrats and the spineless stupid pussies that call themselves Republicans (when cornered).

While I could do without both of those groups, I certainly will not align myself with the neo-liberals that call themselves Libertarians. So that doesn’t leave many parties that I can take up standard with, do it?

Shall I ignore Paul’s lies in regard to his newsletters? Shall I ignore his naivete in regard to sworn and demonstrated enemies? Shall I ignore his misinterpretations? And good lord, shall I ignore the evidence that he is just plain old bonkers?

By the way, I used the word cult above … let’s explore that a little more. Ask any Obamabot if there’s something, anything they don’t like about their demi-god. I’d bet you’d not find any that couldn’t list at least one thing. Then ask any Newter or Mittens fan the same question. Still I bet you won’t find a single one that can’t name something they don’t like about their guy.
Now, ask a Ronulan. I bet you can’t find a true Paulbot that will admit to anything bad about the dear Doctor.

There’s a difference between support and worship -- and when RonPaulies can find no fault with him, I call that a cult.

Hans
Hans
9 years ago
Reply to  Bubba

Ev’nin’, Mr Bubba, nice to hear from you tonight.

Thought I might stir up a bit of conversation with this post and I hope you realize my stick was aimed for the eye of the RINO.

I agree that an absence of some minimal constitutional government would create “…a vacuum that would be immediately filled…”. Those who seek to rule by force are probably drawn to Ron Paul because his policies remove many impediments to their agenda.

We who seek relief from “big government” also have much to gain as ‘a partial vacuum’ would remove most of the laws “malum prohibitum”. If the historic layers of progressive Statute and Ordinance were rolled back, consider how much easier and safer it might be to defend your life and property from encroachment by persons or States.

The conflict between collective force and individual Rights would be drawn into the open, rather than cloaked in the fog of party politics.

Which brings me to your closing comment “…I certainly will not align myself with the neo-liberals that call themselves Libertarians.”

I must ask for clarification. Do you reject behaviors of specific Libertarians whom you have known, or do you dislike the label “Libertarian” because it evolved from a 19th century French exploration into communism and has been applied by Chomsky et al to their Libertarian socialism and anarchism?

If your issue is with a person, or ambiguity and abuse of the label, I have no argument.

The core philosophy of modern Libertarianism however, stated as ‘a political philosophy that holds individual liberty as the basic moral principle of society’, would seem difficult to reject.

Best Regards

Bubba
9 years ago
Reply to  Hans

Hans,
My rejection of Libertarianism is for the same reason you reject ‘R’epublicans …. because both no longer represent the real parties of patriots. As you said RINO, I also say LINO.

The difference is, I reckon, that the RINOs are nothing better than democrat dick monkeys, and must be rejected by rank and file republicans if they are ever to get their party back. LINOs are stark raving crazy, and they have not been rejected or called out by the sane liberty loving minorities of what used to be Libertarians.

If Libertarians of sound mind, like yourself, desire to remain credible they absolutely must step away and separate themselves from the nutjobs that have taken over their party. If you’re not a 9/11 truther, if contrails in the sky strike no fear in your heart, if you can look at a lawn sprinkler rainbow without wondering what government conspiracy is causing it -- then you should be concerned about the fact that an unreasonably high percentage of your fellow Libers are not on the same psychiatric level with you -- and their poster boy is Ron Paul.

Hans
Hans
9 years ago
Reply to  Bubba

‘mornin’ good Sir

You make a great point when you say: “LINOs are stark raving crazy, and they have not been rejected or called out by the sane liberty loving minorities of what used to be Libertarians.” A significant portion of Paul’s following can be properly described as “cult”.

I make the same claim of RINO’s and “moderate Democrats” … they are cults of persons without consistent philosophy who are deluded into support of party in order to achieve comfort … give us power and we will make you / ourselves safe.

Am I a “truther”? No. Do I contemplate the governmental cause and effect of “chemtrails”? No.

Do I understand the principle of refraction that creates the rainbow? Yes. Am I willing to tolerate danger and uncertainty in order to achieve Liberty? Yes.

All of our current political factions have their camp-followers, and some, as you correctly point out with regard to the “Paulies”, are potentially more dangerous than others.

One unfortunate aspect of advocacy for Liberty is the necessary acceptance that freedom also means the freedom to ‘behave badly’ … until such behavior negatively impacts the corresponding Liberty of others.

I make an intellectual effort to separate Ron Paul (as a principled individual) from the camp-followers who seek to use him for their anarchist or statist agenda.

There are aspects of Paul’s political history and policies that trouble me. I have similar issues with the history and policies of the other candidates in the “R”epublican primary. Don’t get me started on the DemonRats.

I keep an eye and ear open to how people, especially in the Patriot movement, respond to Ron Paul’s published message because I believe their response is a good indicator of whether this country is ready for a return to personal Liberty and individual responsibility.

No other motives here …

Bubba
9 years ago
Reply to  Hans

Oh no, let’s do get started on demonrats as you call them. I prefer the term dhimmicrats.

Hans
Hans
9 years ago
Reply to  Hans

Perhaps a new post for NCRenegade … Bubba’s opinions on the philosophy, characteristics and impact of dhimmicrats … would be worthwhile.

Nice chatting with you !

Bubba
9 years ago

On second thought, neither of us has the time for a thorough discussion of the impact of the herd of parasites that currently possess what used to be the Democrat Party.
Let’s just call them Marxists unused targets and moveon.

But you can start a new thread anyway -- broach the subject of does it matter, at all, who is the president when it all blows to hell.

Always fun chatting with the Hans.

DRenegade
Admin
9 years ago
Reply to  Bubba

Finally. After the articles and threads about Ron Paul, GOP primary candidates and 2012 elections, the nail has been hit on the head. It is not if it all blows to hell, it is when it all blows to hell.

Ron Paul is gaining traction in the general population for two reasons:

1. He is talking about issues that people are interested in such as monetary policy and the role of the military.
2. He supports the Constitution: he has a 100% voting record for the Constitution according to the John Birch Society.

Why are we not discussing the Fed bailout of the ECB, the $1.2 trillion debt ceiling extension or the collapse in Iraq since our troops left that is being covered up? Time to fess up: are we trying to support a system too corrupt and insolvent to continue or are we trying to survive more than 48 hours? If you think you can do both, you are the proverbial lawyer defending himself.

Bubba
9 years ago
Reply to  DRenegade

” …. not if it all blows to hell, it is when … ”
I agree with that. The question is no longer if but when -- plus a few follow-up questions:
How bad?
How long?
and what kind of government do we end up with when it’s all over -- or perhaps what flag will we fly then?

Under other circumstances I would worry that the enemies of America would attack her while she’s sick and weak. But the current circumstances moot that worry:
1 -- America will probably be the last of them all to fall, and probably the first to recover
2 -- Most of America’s dangerous enemies are within America.

Both of which bring me back to the original subject.
The coming crash will be the direct results of stupid people doing stupid things. The core of America’s woes is the same as all the rest -- socialism and pussyism. We’ve all allowed and tolerated the experiments in socialism, hoping and hoping that for once maybe it’ll work.
The ones that wake up first, get off their asses first, take bold actions first will be the survivors. If enemy states are the first to recover they’re gonna come knocking. Hiding behind the RonPaul turtle shell will not stop them, it wont slow them down, and they wont even think we’re cute.

Ron Paul’s gained ‘traction’ is not the result of knowledgeable discourse of monetary policy, or the role of military or constitutional conformity.
Increased awareness is not the same thing as traction gained and the exact same swarm of Paulbot hippies does not become ‘general population’ just because more people of talking about them.

DRenegade
Admin
9 years ago
Reply to  Bubba

Agreed. Traction will not translate into effective action. Time to read “The Art of War” to see what will be important to maintain security.

randysright
9 years ago

I trust Ron Paul more than any other man running for President.

DRenegade
Admin
9 years ago
Reply to  randysright

Based on the level of people’s conversations lately, that means you are voting for Michele Bachmann.

Bubba
9 years ago
Reply to  randysright

And why is that, Randy?
Is it because of something Ron said or something a Ronulan told you he said?
What do you really know about Ron Paul?

randysright
9 years ago
Reply to  Bubba

All I know about Ron Paul is his “career track record” voting on bills…other than that…absolutely nothing.

But that’s all I need to know or what really counts for anything. I do truly believe Ron Paul and his son want to return to a Constitutional govt.

It’s why I respect John Ainsworth’s work also.

Anything less from a politician, you might as well leave Obama in office.

Bubba
9 years ago
Reply to  randysright

ok, so what do you know about his voting record?
What kinda of bills has he voted for and against?
How many has he written?
How many earmarks has he tagged on?

Better yet, how many times has he added earmarks to bills he knew would pass but intended to vote against?

You know, alot of liberals claim to want a constitutional government but the problem is, like with the Pauls, their concept of constitutional doesn’t always mesh with mine. Paul and his fellow liberals like to concentrate on certain parts of it, mis-interpret other parts and then just screw the rest.