See other Ron Paul Articles
Title: BREAKING HARD: RON PAUL SUPPORTS OBAMA
Source:
CNN
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 2, 2008
Author: CNN
Post Date: 2008-05-02 18:28:55 by a vast rightwing conspirator
Keywords: None
Views: 9014
Comments: 534
First, he told Blitz that he can't endorse McCain.
Then, Blitz asked him which one he prefers, of the 2 Demos. RP said that he picks Obama because he's slightly better which is EXACTLY what I've been saying for quite a while.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-116) not displayed.
.
.
.
#117. To: Jethro Tull (#116)
The others surely will not. There is a very small chance Obama would do something on that front.
Hell, I read recently that they gobbled up an Ag based corporation.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I don't expect Obama to perform miracles. I don't even know if he would be able to set a trend toward less U.S. belligerence but, it's possible that, if the neocon cacophony is muffled, more intelligent people would realize that America's problem is not 'America's (imaginary) enemies' but America's effectively committing economic, cultural and moral suicide. I am skeptical that the process can be reversed but, man... can we get a little break before we resume our slide down the slippery slope? By the way, it is true that there continue to be U.S. troops in Korea, Japan and in Europe. However, there are no U.S. troops left in Vietnam, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon. It is true that, in all these instances, the U.S. was driven out either by force or via eviction notices served by sovereign governments. While Obama may not be able to fully withdraw all of our troops from Iraq on his own, a sovereign Iraqi government may be in the position to demand the complete withdrawal once our occupation army shrinks to a level that permits the Iraqi government to make such a request without fear of being brutally coerced.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Oh really? His defined Middle East policy is to hold Israel "sacrosanct" and to move "some" troops from Iraq to Afghanistan so they can "hunt down" Al Qaeda, which is nothing more than creation of the US government. To anyone who thinks we're leaving the Middle East, Santa is coming 12/25/08.
Afghanistan is not in the Middle East. Israel may care little whether we expand, maintain or end the war there. Israel is probably worried about the Paki nukes so, to the extent that the Paki gov't is kept on the leash, they don't really care who's in charge in Kabul.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
All the wars I mentioned prior to Iraq were brought to us by non-neocon politicians. Removing them (good luck) would change MIC intervention how?
Are we talking about the same guy that early on the labeled the Iraq invasion, in non-elitist terms, easily understood by all, a "dumb" war? One ne'er-do-well, with more than a little help from his "friends", got us into this mess and one man can get us out.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I didn't say it was. Obama is sending troops currently in Iraq, to Afghanistan to war with a US government created entity. And, BTW, should Pakistan (a nuclear power) pop it's ugly head up, he said he'd poke them in the ribs too.
I come every year. I said a slight chance. Do you agree with Ron Paul that Obama is slightly better than Hillary and McCain?
Please limit your argument to what you know best. Use the terms racist, bigot, and xenophobe as much as possible. Thanks.
That is one of the stupidest comments ever posted on this forum ever. If you think the President of the USA has any real power other than figure head than you haven't been paying attention the last 100 years.
God is always good!
To the extent that 'national priorities' are identified and pursued, national resources, such as the military, can be maintained and the proper level. The neocon cacophony makes a rational discussion of national priorities impossible and false priorities (the war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on climate changes - talking about fighting windmills) are presented and funded as main priorities. Obama owes nothing to the neocons while McCain owes them nearly everything. So, yes, there is some 'hope' that Obama may try to purge them off the executive's most powerful positions.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Well said. Ron Paul wouldn't have produced miracles either, but each man would do his best to execute a serious U-turn.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
No, RP is wrong. Obama - on the domestic front - can make things for me significantly worse for me and others who want to hold onto what little freedom we still have. Our foreign policy isn't controlled by the president.
that's the objective here
Obama stated that he would try to blow up AlQueda guys in Paki if there was sufficient intelligence that made it possible. He never threatened to obliterate Pakistan or overthrow their government.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
I refuse to be as limited in my outlook as you are, Jeth.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
The neo philosophy wasn't at the root of our internationalism. It goes back to at least Wilson, probably earlier. Removing them changes the chairs on the Titanic. And again, Obama has promised us more war in different locations.
that's the objective here The fact is that Ron Paul did express a preference for Obama. It happened and it is documented. I am personally not surprised that he prefers Obama, given the reality of Hillary and McCain bidding for the same job but I do find it surprising and refreshing that he actually publicly stated his preference while he is still, in theory, still running for the same position. This is quite unprecedented. Can anyone name ANY other presidential candidate expressing a preference for another candidate FROM ANOTHER PARTY while he was still in the running? I don't believe that it ever happened but... maybe I am wrong. Given the circumstances - Ron Paul technically running against Obama - his expressing a preference for Obama should be viewed as an implicit endorsement of Obama. That's how I interpret it.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Hey, hey, hey! We're not concerned here with an economic-basket-case, chaotic, terrorist- shielding, dictator-headed "ally" .... get with the program.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
They were created by the American government. Agree?
Ron Paul has been with us for twenty five years, anti government all the way.He came in on his own, all alone, and is still alone. The lone American in Congress that is shunned by all. Obummer was created from nothing, from dust if you will, created for a purpose. And white guilters are marching as if to war, doing exactly as they are programmed.
And also think of the reason why he did it: the war issue. Some people here may think that the war issue does not matter, because -- they think -- no president can change things. It would appear Ron Paul does not agree with that.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
True, but the neocons are the engine sustaining it. I would call it 'imperialism' though. It seems that the US has 2 main imperialist priorities now: Israel-related issues and Latin America. With the Neocons diminished, all Israel-related activities could decrease. As far Latin America, they seem to be able to increasingly take care of themselves - they don't seem to be as afraid or as submissive no more so... we may be left facing ourselves in a mirror, soon. Like Ben Stein used to say, 'it's going to be ugly'.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Wilson eventually lost the political argument. It could happen again.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
You could be correct Jethro. But how are the other two any better than Obama. What specifically makes them better. I'm not voting for Obama. I'm voting third party. But the way Rush and Hannity promote Hillary. It almost makes me want to vote for Obama.
If i was a comedy writer, i'd say that was the laugh line, right there. the three left now will all be running our country off the same script. If we can see it, based on their affiliation with certain orgs, than RP should know . There is not a whiffs difference between the 3. His very mention of Obama was a stupid move.
They were created by the American government. Agree? Our government helped the anti-Soviet resistance in Afghanistan in the 80's. This was one good thing that our cover services did well. They gave the Russkies a bloody nose and, in the end, they lost half of their empire. Al Queda emerged as a reaction to our government's attempts to rule the Arab world via war (Iraq), the establishment of military bases and buying off, corrupting and maintaining in power the local governments for the purpose, they concluded, to make the Middle East safe for Israel.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
And your confusion may subside when you come to the realization that you cannot hold two beliefs, both of which are mutually contradictory, and believe they are both equally credible. That is one of the definitions of insanity.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. There's now a diary on this on Daily Kos that confirms that Ron Paul really did say this: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/3/32255/72168/317/508201.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Did you forget Paul took a dive and got political religion all of a sudden???? After that, anything he has to say for public consumption is suspect.
Freedoms? You mean the ones promised in that "Goddamned Piece of Paper"? Yeah, keep on doing your damnedest to help elect the Bush clone or the beast hell bent on showing she's got the worlds largest testicles. Sheesh! You make so little sense, Jethro, that I'm becoming convinced you'll ultimately convert most of this forum into Obamaphiles.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
OK, so we agree, the Mujahideen were trained and funded by the US and are now our deadliest foe in Iraq and elsewhere. They are our creation. We had no business in Afghanistan in the 1980s. None whatsoever.
Uh huh. Move along, nothing to see here ... just a little speed bump.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
And your confusion may subside when you come to the realization that you cannot hold two beliefs, both of which are mutually contradictory, and believe they are both equally credible. That is one of the definitions of insanity. Seriously, there is no reason for personal attacks. I believe that there is some basis to believe that some oppose Obama because he is a half-darkie. I know of such people and not all of them are 'old'. It is also legitimate to be skeptical that Obama may be able to fully implement his stated anti-war agenda. But, I believe, this can be discussed without getting 'personal'. By participating in this interesting discussion, all have proved their concerned and well informed citizens credentials but not everyone (probably no one) is fully informed or 100% right. That's why discussions and debates are useful and can be interesting.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Your pesky attempts at sanity are the best advertisement for rejecting Obama.
The Golem A Jewish Legend "Four elements," he said, "are required for the creation of the golem or homunculus, namely, earth, water, fire and air." "I myself," thought the holy man, "possess the power of the wind; my son-in-law embodies fire, while my favorite pupil is the symbol of water, and between the three of us we are bound to succeed in our work." He urged on his companions the necessity of great secrecy and asked them to spend seven days in preparing for the work. On the twentieth day of the month of Adar, in the year five thousand three hundred and forty after the creation of the world, in the fourth hour after midnight, the three men betook themselves to a river on the outskirts of the city on the banks of which they found a loam pit. Here they kneaded the soft clay and fashioned the figure of a man three ells high. They fashioned the features, hands and feet, and then placed the figure of clay on its back upon the ground. The three learned men then stood at the feet of the image which they had created and the rabbi commanded his son-in-law to walk round the figure seven times, while reciting a cabalistic formula he had himself composed. And as soon as the son-in-law had completed the seven rounds and recited the formula, the figure of clay grew red like a gleaming coal. Thereupon the rabbi commanded his pupil to perform the same action, namely, walk round the lifeless figure seven times while reciting another formula. The effect of the performance was this time an abatement of the heat. The figure grew moist and vapors emanated from it, while nails sprouted on the tips of its fingers and its head was suddenly covered with hair. The face of the figure of clay looked like that of a man of about thirty.
"Better put some ice on that lip" Your support for a Marxist racist Establishment lackey is duly noted...
So is Obama. He would have never gotten as far as he has if he weren't. But keep drinking the establishment Kool Aid. I hear--not that I know personally--that the taste gets almost bearable in time. Not that I want to know either.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. We had no business in Afghanistan in the 1980s. None whatsoever. Not exactly. The Mujah... pre-existed the CIA support. They were a natural reaction to the Russian occupation. It was okay for the CIA to support them because they were fighting for their country. It is also okay for Iran to support those who oppose our invasion of Iraq. When people are fighting an enemy that can afford billion-dollar high-tech weapons systems, I have no problem with them being given some simple weapons that make them more effective at countering the aggression.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Comments (157 - 534) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latestyou believe one man, Barack Obama, a lowly state senator three years ago, will be able to stop the the MIC and its lust for money and power?
#118. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#114)
there aren't a lot of U.S. assets they would like to buy, other than those that the congress refuses to let them buy - some defense-related stuff.
#119. To: Jethro Tull (#116)
#120. To: Old Friend, Dreamers, all (#117)
There is a very small chance Obama would do something on that front.
#121. To: Jethro Tull (#120)
#122. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#119)
if the neocon cacophony is muffled, more intelligent people would realize that America's problem is not 'America's (imaginary) enemies'
#123. To: Jethro Tull (#116)
are you honestly telling me you believe one man, Barack Obama, a lowly state senator three years ago, will be able to stop the the MIC and its lust for money and power?
#124. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#121)
#125. To: Jethro Tull (#120)
To anyone who thinks we're leaving the Middle East, Santa is coming 12/25/08.
#126. To: iconoclast (#123)
and one man can get us out.
#127. To: iconoclast (#123)
One ne'er-do-well, with more than a little help from his "friends", got us into this mess and one man can get us out.
#128. To: Jethro Tull (#122)
#129. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#119)
I don't expect Obama to perform miracles. I don't even know if he would be able to set a trend toward less U.S. belligerence but, it's possible that, if the neocon cacophony is muffled, more intelligent people would realize that America's problem is not 'America's (imaginary) enemies' but America's effectively committing economic, cultural and moral suicide.
#130. To: Old Friend (#125)
Do you agree with Ron Paul that Obama is slightly better than Hillary and McCain?
#131. To: Pissed Off Janitor (#38)
Ron Paul is to Obama as Iraq is to 9/11. If you repeat it enough times, no matter how unrelated they are, in the same sentence then soon people will draw a connection between the two.
#132. To: Jethro Tull (#124)
should Pakistan (a nuclear power) pop it's ugly head up, he said he'd poke them in the ribs too.
#133. To: Jethro Tull (#126)
Please limit your argument to what you know best.
#134. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#128)
#135. To: christine (#131)
Ron Paul is to Obama as Iraq is to 9/11. If you repeat it enough times, no matter how unrelated they are, in the same sentence then soon people will draw a connection between the two.
#136. To: Jethro Tull (#124)
And, BTW, should Pakistan (a nuclear power) pop it's ugly head up, he said he'd poke them in the ribs too.
#137. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, Arator, all (#132)
AlQueda guys in Paki
#138. To: christine, Jethro Tull (#131)
#139. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#135)
Given the circumstances - Ron Paul technically running against Obama - his expressing a preference for Obama should be viewed as an implicit endorsement of Obama. That's how I interpret it.
#140. To: Jethro Tull (#134)
The neo philosophy wasn't at the root of our internationalism.
#141. To: Jethro Tull (#134)
It goes back to at least Wilson, probably earlier.
#142. To: Jethro Tull (#130)
#143. To: Jethro Tull (#130)
" Our foreign policy isn't controlled by the president"
#144. To: Jethro Tull (#137)
AlQueda guys in Paki
#145. To: iconoclast, Hayek Fan (#87)
Your confusion will subside when you manage to grasp two or more ideas simultaneously.
Lord Acton
#146. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
#147. To: castletrash (#143)
His very mention of Obama was a stupid move.
#148. To: Jethro Tull (#130)
No, RP is wrong. Obama - on the domestic front - can make things for me significantly worse for me and others who want to hold onto what little freedom we still have.
#149. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#144)
#150. To: Jethro Tull (#134)
The neo philosophy wasn't at the root of our internationalism.
#151. To: James Deffenbach (#145)
Your confusion will subside when you manage to grasp two or more ideas simultaneously.
#152. To: iconoclast (#148)
I'm becoming convinced you'll ultimately convert most of this forum into Obamaphiles.
#153. To: Cynicom (#138)
(Edited)
"Obummer was created from nothing, from dust if you will, created for a purpose"
#154. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#151)
"Just lie back and enjoy it"
#155. To: iconoclast (#113)
Hillary and McCain are tired old establishment personified.
Lord Acton
#156. To: Jethro Tull (#149)
OK, so we agree, the Mujahideen were trained and funded by the US and are now our deadliest foe in Iraq and elsewhere. They are our creation.
.
.
.