Neocons welcome?

[Lipo]

As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

 

[Kojack]

Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum?

Ron Paul? I don't think he spends too much time hanging out here.

It's great that you support the Constitution but I don't see what you would get out of hanging out here. It's unlikely that anyone will throw you out, but this is not a very receptive audience for those views.

If you're asking the forum in general, I say, do what you like, no hostile behavior.

 

[Maverick]

Yeah, pretty much what Kojack said. Say what you like, but don't expect us to join in a Bush love-fest with you or something.

 

[steph3n]

Lipo,

You are welcome here, but let me tell you you are dead wrong on "open association" with "anti-semitism and racism"

why? Because he is NOT. You can go to any rally he attends and get a picture with him no questions asked, he will even sign a shirt, bullhorn, book, money, or whatever no questions asked. You could when he was in congress(i mean before campaigning basically) and in his office go visit him more easily than most any other congressman. Talking to him does NOT mean an open association.

the other points can be studied and looked into and you can make your own choice on them, but most everyone supports Paul on his steadfast positions.

 

[Ozwest]

If you are diametrically opposed to Ron Pauls positions on the Middle East, and refer to him as being anti-semetic and racist, you could not possibly call yourself a supporter.

 

[iptf2]

Lipo Why Are You Here? Are You A Spy For The Bush Worshipers/ I, For One Resent You Being Here I Changed My Party To Vote For Ron Paul And I Resent You Being Here. All You Want To Do Is Bash. Take Your Ass Somewhere Else I Am Only Speaking For Myself.

 

[undergroundrr]

I doubt you'd be kicked off. Having said that, you ask if you'd be accepted as a supporter, while not really indicating that you are one. If you are a Paul supporter, why on earth?

If you are a supporter of the Constitution, I hope you'll at least give Dr. Paul the benefit of the doubt in demanding we follow its presciptions for congressional declaration of war, gold and silver money, executive restraint, due process, habeas corpus, etc.

I would imagine people would take exception to your point about association with various isms. You carefully phrased it. But it's pointless unless you were implying endorsement of those isms. Dr. Paul also openly associates with racism, socialism, welfare statism, hypocricy, fascism and other undesirables every day he attends a session of the House of Representatives. So what is your point?

 

[Exponent]

Lipo Why Are You Here? Are You A Spy For The Bush Worshipers/ I, For One Resent You Being Here I Changed My Party To Vote For Ron Paul And I Resent You Being Here. All You Want To Do Is Bash. Take Your Ass Somewhere Else I Am Only Speaking For Myself.

Now that is one strange post.

I am glad some more level-headed posters, able to communicate well, got into this thread first. Lipo has not bashed anyone. There might be some very strong disgreements, yes, and most of us will certainly take issue with the claims of association with anti-semitism and racism, but Lipo stated his position in a decent and mature manner. I respect that, and I wish such an attitude more thoroughly pervaded this forum.

But at least you only claim to be speaking for yourself, I'll give you that. (By the way, your capitalization really confuses me. I'm perplexed, but at the same time curiously intrigued regarding the intentions behind such capitalization.)

 

[Dexter_Roseville]

Lipo Why Are You Here? Are You A Spy For The Bush Worshipers/ I, For One Resent You Being Here I Changed My Party To Vote For Ron Paul And I Resent You Being Here. All You Want To Do Is Bash. Take Your Ass Somewhere Else I Am Only Speaking For Myself.

Why do you capitalize the first letter of each word? Be nice to new comers, even if their views are different from ours.

While you seem to be ill informed, I'm sure you'll find most of the people here are peaceful and won't force you out.

 

[nate895]

One of my few disagreements

As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

I have a few disagreements with Dr. Paul, but when was the last time you agreed with anyone else on everything? One of my disagreements is that "blowback" caused 9/11. I disagree because Islam has been on the war path since the 620s, so I think they are the second greatest threat to the West (after neocons, the enemy within). Overall, however, I think he is the greatest of our protectors, we can hold out against the Islamists for at least 50 years with an President who doesn't think they would go after us if we hadn't stationed a couple of tanks there, but we can't hold out for 4 years against the neocons.

 

[Corydoras]

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

The issue is not would he mind, but would other supporters mind... and whether you have the stomach to deal with their attitude.

I'm a paleocon, and sometimes the things that people say on this board make me swear at the computer. I once had an extended exchange with someone who enraged me to the point where I literally could not see straight for a few seconds after every new post I read from this person. I would say that about twice a week I wonder if I'm in the wrong movement, where so many people disagree with me about so much.

But I stick with it, as you see from my post count. I bet you have valuable things to add to the discussions here.

Call me cynical, but I don't think the point of the campaign is to get voters aligned with all or even most of Ron Paul's views; I think the point is to get a majority of people convinced for whatever reasons they have to vote for him. If they want to vote for him because he loves to grow roses and tomatoes, so be it.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who cares about the issues I am most concerned about, and it sounds to me like he is for you as well.

Thank you for being upfront about your concerns. Welcome.

 

[angelatc]

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

Sure, and welcome. I don't think everybody here believes in every single plank of the Ron Paul platform. But if you're discussing policy, no personal attacks. Personally I always find it prudent to try to avoid the word "you' when making points.

As for the economy....might I suggest this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs

 

[Jon S]

haha i don't agree with you on anything you said... but i still don't look at is a "neocons" being welcomed. i look at it as VOTERS being welcomed.

 

[Lipo]

Lipo,
You are welcome here, but let me tell you you are dead wrong on "open association" with "anti-semitism and racism"

I'm very glad to hear that. I would much rather hear Dr. Paul's clear refutation of both, such that there is no ambiguity whatsoever.

It being understandable that Dr. Paul doesn't want to openly offend his very diverse base of support, whatever its persuasion and for political reasons, one can see why he may not want to do that.

I am obliged to hold it against him until he does.

the other points can be studied and looked into and you can make your own choice on them, but most everyone supports Paul on his steadfast positions.

Fair enough. I disagree with them. Strongly. But I am open to persuasion as I hope you will be open to my own. I may be wrong.

I think it would be a miracle if Ron Paul were elected. I don't doubt for a moment that the instant President Paul was sworn in, the difficulty of administering and governing the United States would kick in, honing down his embrace of radical or revolutionary change against the exigencies of prudent governance. I admire his principled convictions on the Constitution and think he could prove an effective and rational leader.

 

[quantized]

As an avowed supporter of the War in Iraq and a friend of Israel, I seem to closely resemble the stereotype of "neocon" as I've seen it defined on these forums. I support George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy, see no good reason to return to the gold standard, and regard Iran as an existential threat not simply to Israel but to the the United States and Europe.

I think foreign interventionism as a means of maintaining regional and global stability is desireable. Invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was an entirely good thing. The US economy is not going to collapse and is in fact, wealthier and more productive than it has ever been before.

Dr. Paul's open association with anti-semitism and racism is particularly offensive.

I appear to stand in direct opposition to nearly every single foreign policy and economic policy proscription Dr. Ron Paul offers as part of his candidacy for President of the United States, save one.

I appreciate, support and admire Dr. Ron Paul's veneration of the US Constitution and of his desire that the US government closely and accurately abide by it.

Question: Will Ron Paul accept me as a supporter? Would he mind if I openly advocate my point of view on this forum, even as diametrically opposed (with one exception) as it is to his own?

So what makes you a supporter of Ron Paul? Or are you associating yourself loosely here? Why would you want to support a candidate who apparently has quite a different viewpoint than what you hold... why not other candidates? Would you mind elaborate more on this? I apologies if I sound like I am prying too much.

FYI, I was a Hillary supporter until I caught the Ron Paul Revolution fever.

 

[Cap'n Crunk]

I'm very glad to hear that. I would much rather hear Dr. Paul's clear refutation of both, such that there is no ambiguity whatsoever.

It being understandable that Dr. Paul doesn't want to openly offend his very diverse base of support, whatever its persuasion and for political reasons, one can see why he may not want to do that.

I am obliged to hold it against him until he does.



Fair enough. I disagree with them. Strongly. But I am open to persuasion as I hope you will be open to my own. I may be wrong.

I think it would be a miracle if Ron Paul were elected. I don't doubt for a moment that the instant President Paul was sworn in, the difficulty of administering and governing the United States would kick in, honing down his embrace of radical or revolutionary change against the exigencies of prudent governance. I admire his principled convictions on the Constitution and and think he could prove an effective and rational leader.

your going to hold what against him? he's said many times he does not support their views. here's a video of Ron Paul being asked about the donations.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dcLSLGXypMY

 

[Lipo]

So what is your point?

My point is that if Dr. Paul wants to be President, he should make some very clear distinctions between what he is and what he is not.

I'm perfectly willing to take his word for it, but he must be equivocal, declaratory and unambiguous.

 

[Cap'n Crunk]

My point is that if Dr. Paul wants to be President, he should make some very clear distinctions between what he is and what he is not.

I'm perfectly willing to take his word for it, but he must be equivocal, declaratory and unambiguous.

I think you can figure out what Ron Paul really stands for by just looking at his consistent voting record.

 

[noiseordinance]

I still find it mind-blowing that some folks out there supported our invasion of Iraq when, at the same exact moment, we had North Korea telling the UN, "get your damn cameras out of our nuclear facilities." We also have African countries being ruled by gangs of 12 year old children.

I was never a fan of Saddam Husein, but how can anyone justify going after him (besides our interest in oil) when there are many more clear and present dangers going on elsewhere in the world?

Don't forget, Iraq didn't attack us, or threaten us.

 

[LukeNM]

It’s funny; I used to hold many of those same beliefs, until I started thinking for myself, and stopped listening to and believing what was being feed to me by the mainstream media. Not one of the things you mention is an original idea. Every one of them can be attributed to someone else thoughts on how this country should think and be.

I feel the founding fathers conspired to development a system of government that promoted the masses and our current government conspires to expand a system of government the promotes the few.

So you are either very rich and gaining from the current establishment or very young and have truly not discovered how the current government is hurting this country and its citizenry. Don’t get me wrong; it is good to support your country, right or wrong. But we have an opportunity to change that.

The wars we fight today are not the wars of our fathers and it is costing us our sons and daughters. These wars have noting to do with our freedom and they have much to do about money.

I caution you however, if you choose to remain a member of these forums – unless you are willing to change your position on many of the issues you mention you better leave now before you become enlightened.