The Peace Candidate - Lincoln Chafee

[Rad]

I occasionally see that Rand Paul is an AIPAC stooge. After all, he doesn't stand with libertarian peace groups like Hamas. So I was curious to see how much of that AIPAC money Rand must be swimming in. It must be a lot, right? He doesn't support Hamas, so obviously he is a sellout. http://maplight.org/us-congress/interest/J5100/view/all

Those Pro-Israel groups have weird way of showing their affection for a neocon stooge like Rand. They give him the least amount of anyone. And they run million dollar ad buys against him and they run ads of families getting nuked if Rand becomes President.

I know and Rand keeps on sucking up to them. Its fine to support Israel. Its not fine to make Israel and Saudi Arabia's enemies America's. Its not fine to choose political ambition over peace (the Iran deal). Rand knows Iran is a non-issue. He said so himself.

I don't want anymore terrorist attacks against the US. I'm sure Ron Paul wouldn't mind talking to Hamas. We talked to the Iranians and Soviets. He'd much rather stay out of it all together. That would be the preferred solution. The Muslim world knows the US who arms the Israelis for brutal attacks like in Gaza last year.There is a declassified CIA report that says Israeli treatment of Palestinians was radicalizing Sunni Muslims (you know the ones like ISIS and Al Qaeda). This report was dated before 9/11.

 

[Krugminator2]

You are right Lincoln Chafee is bad on gun rights.

Rand once said about Iran:

He isn't terrible just on gun rights. He seems to be terrible on almost everything, as I listed.

Rand supports and supported negotiations with Iran. He won't vote for this particular deal. So what? It will go through. He also said he wouldn't rescind the agreement if he were President. So fine. Chafee is marginally better on this one issue. Rand is like a 98 out of 100 and you have Chafee who maybe a 15 out of a 100.

I

I'm sure Ron Paul wouldn't mind talking to Hamas. We talked to the Iranians and Soviets. He'd much rather stay out of it all together. That would be the preferred solution. The Muslim world knows the US who arms the Israelis for brutal attacks like in Gaza last year.

The correct answer is for us to stay out altogether. The problem is you take step further. You seem to be siding with the Palestinians over Israel and that is your beef with Rand. I notice this a lot from the "antiwar" crowd. I have no sympathy whatsoever for the Palestinians. Frankly don't care about either side. But if I am choosing I'm sure not siding with Hamas.

 

[William Tell]

If Rand saying we should end all foreign aid isn't enough for you, I don't know what to say. Does your boy Lincoln even oppose foreign aid?

 

[rg17]

Chafee on the issue

http://www.ontheissues.org/Lincoln_Chafee.htm

 

[Rad]

What's useless about it? He made a good point.

I came on here at the very beginning fighting the newsletters trying to keep supporters. That was my motivation for signing up originally. I'm sorry I don't have much to say unless it is important. I figured people who were left out in the cold from Rand's betrayal on Iran like me would like to check out someone decent on foreign policy. Chafee isn't a libertarian nor a paleoconservative so he is going to have a record of gun control and open borders (libertarians like immigration but paleoconservatives do not). I guess all the antiwar peeps left who were like me and who were happy with Ron Paul's Giuliani moment and wanted to be a Republic again. Who saw war as the most destructive force of all against life and liberty. All that is left are Eric Dondero style Libertarian Republicans. Which is strange for a forum named after Ron Paul whose main focus was a peaceful foreign policy and ending the fed. He spoke good about the Iran deal recently. It is telling when he endorsed his son he didn't mention foreign policy. The conservatives at the American Conservative are unhappy with Rand because of his foreign policy. The Libertarians at Antiwar.com are sad as well. The only one that still seems to like Rand despite his flips and flops is Jack Hunter at rare (who is more of a hindrance than an asset to the Rand Paul campaign due to his former political incorrectness).

 

[Sola_Fide]

I came on here at the very beginning fighting the newsletters trying to keep supporters. That was my motivation for signing up originally. I'm sorry I don't have much to say unless it is important. I figured people who were left out in the cold from Rand's betrayal on Iran like me would like to check out someone decent on foreign policy. Chafee isn't a libertarian nor a paleoconservative so he is going to have a record of gun control and open borders (libertarians like immigration but paleoconservatives do not). I guess all the antiwar peeps left who were like me and who were happy with Ron Paul's Giuliani moment and wanted to be a Republic again. Who saw war as the most destructive force of all against life and liberty. All that is left are Eric Dondero style Libertarian Republicans. Which is strange for a forum named after Ron Paul whose main focus was a peaceful foreign policy and ending the fed. He spoke good about the Iran deal recently. It is telling when he endorsed his son he didn't mention foreign policy. The conservatives at the American Conservative are unhappy with Rand because of his foreign policy. The Libertarians at Antiwar.com are sad as well. The only one that still seems to like Rand despite his flips and flops is Jack Hunter at rare (who is more of a hindrance than an asset to the Rand Paul campaign due to his former political incorrectness).

You sound like you want Ron Paul to run in 2016. I do too, but sadly he's not.

If being "anti war" is the only issue that really animates you, then you aren't a libertarian. Sadly, many people who "supported" Ron Paul in the past were not libertarians...and this is becoming increasingly clear.

Furthermore, socialists like Chafee or Sanders can't truly be anti-war because at the heart of their ideology is a steadfast commitment to state coercion, which it seems always flows from domestic coercion to foreign coercion.

 

[Rad]

He isn't terrible just on gun rights. He seems to be terrible on almost everything, as I listed.

Rand supports and supported negotiations with Iran. He won't vote for this particular deal. So what? It will go through. He also said he wouldn't rescind the agreement if he were President. So fine. Chafee is marginally better on this one issue. Rand is like a 98 out of 100 and you have Chafee who maybe a 15 out of a 100.



The correct answer is for us to stay out altogether. The problem is you take step further. You seem to be siding with the Palestinians over Israel and that is your beef with Rand. I notice this a lot from the "antiwar" crowd. I have no sympathy whatsoever for the Palestinians. Frankly don't care about either side. But if I am choosing I'm sure not siding with Hamas.

Centcom commanders say that our policy on Israel makes it harder for them to deal with people in the Middle East. 9/11 was revenge for our support for Israel. I think it is sad that the Palestinians live the way they do and rockets are fired at Israel. My loyalty is to the US and I want the US to stay out of that mess. The antiwar crowd dislikes how Israel uses the United States for its war making. Many would quit talking about Israel if Israel would just leave us alone.

 

[RJB]

anyone else find it interesting how many people who barely if ever participate here have suddenly turned up to tell us we're all wrong about everything?

They seem to be seasonal, like tornadoes.

 

[Rad]

You sound like you want Ron Paul to run in 2016. I do too, but sadly he's not.

If being "anti war" is the only issue that really animates you, then you aren't a libertarian. Sadly, many people who "supported" Ron Paul in the past were not libertarians...and this is becoming increasingly clear.

Furthermore, socialists like Chafee or Sanders can't truly be anti-war because at the heart of their ideology is a steadfast commitment to state coercion, which it seems always flows from domestic coercion to foreign coercion.

Rand violated the non-aggression principle when he went off to appease the Neocons on Iran. So people like Justin Raimondo (this guy really tried but threw in the towel after Rand's stand against the Iran deal) and Scott Horton aren't Libertarians because they don't support Rand? What animates me is bone crushing debt, loss of civil liberties, the war economy, and the loss of life from war. Here is Chalmers Johnson explaining why Empire destroys our way of life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQi4-97GXrI

 

[Sola_Fide]

Rand violated the non-aggression principle when he went off to appease the Neocons on Iran. So people like Justin Raimondo (this guy really tried but threw in the towel after Rand's stand against the Iran deal) and Scott Horton aren't Libertarians because they don't support Rand? What animates me is bone crushing debt, loss of civil liberties, the war economy, and the loss of life from war. Here is Chalmers Johnson explaining why Empire destroys our way of life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQi4-97GXrI

I agree with all that. No one like Ron Paul is running for president in 2016. Everyone knows this.

But to pretend that there is not a spectrum of nuance to the candidates running is nuts. Rand is more libertarian than all of them combined, even with his violations of libertarianism.

 

[Rad]

I agree with all that. No one like Ron Paul is running for president in 2016. Everyone knows this.

But to pretend that there is not a spectrum of nuance to the candidates running is nuts. Rand is more libertarian than all of them combined, even with his violations of libertarianism.

I'm sorry but I am not going to accept scraps from the table. I'm not going to be like an evangelical who jumps every time abortion is brought up by cynical and ambitious politicians. That's what I feel Rand is doing on civil liberties. I supposed to accept that and stand with Rand when the cause of the loss of civil liberties is left unchallenged. Rand needs to deal with Empire and quit lying about the Iran deal. It doesn't benefit him. Those who want to be tough on Iran won't vote for him. He just loses my vote. If Chafee makes it through I'll vote for him over Rand. I'll hold my nose doing it but I will. Honestly neither is going to win and Rand will end up losing his supporters to a neocon like Ted Cruz. Chafee is the only one educating the public on foreign policy. I think Ron Paul had something to do with the Iran deal. He brought in fresh air and Obama ran with it and made peace with Cuba and Iran.

I'll be voting in the Republican primary because I have a really good congressman (he so happens to have a subforum here), keeping him in office is my number one priority. I'll probably write his name in. I wish he was running for President. He would be perfect. I'll be rooting for Chafee for President. I hope he gains traction to put pressure on Hillary and Sanders so a pro-American foreign policy becomes an issue again this election season.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I'm sorry but I am not going to accept scraps from the table. I'm not going to be like an evangelical who jumps every time abortion is brought up by cynical and ambitious politicians. That's what I feel Rand is doing on civil liberties. I supposed to accept that and stand with Rand when the cause of the loss of civil liberties is left unchallenged. Rand needs to deal with Empire and quit lying about the Iran deal. It doesn't benefit him. Those who want to be tough on Iran won't vote for him. He just loses my vote. If Chafee makes it through I'll vote for him over Rand. I'll hold my nose doing it but I will. Honestly neither is going to win and Rand will end up losing his supporters to a neocon like Ted Cruz. Chafee is the only one educating the public on foreign policy. I think Ron Paul had something to do with the Iran deal. He brought in fresh air and Obama ran with it and made peace with Cuba and Iran.

I'll be voting in the Republican primary because I have a really good congressman (he so happens to have a subforum here), keeping him in office is my number one priority. I'll probably write his name in. I wish he was running for President. He would be perfect. I'll be rooting for Chafee for President. I hope he gains traction to put pressure on Hillary and Sanders so a pro-American foreign policy becomes an issue again this election season.

You aren't going to "accept scraps from the table", but you are going to support a socialist like Chafee?

Why don't you just write-in Ron Paul?

 

[William Tell]

I'm sorry but I am not going to accept scraps from the table. I'm not going to be like an evangelical who jumps every time abortion is brought up by cynical and ambitious politicians. That's what I feel Rand is doing on civil liberties. I supposed to accept that and stand with Rand when the cause of the loss of civil liberties is left unchallenged. Rand needs to deal with Empire and quit lying about the Iran deal. It doesn't benefit him. Those who want to be tough on Iran won't vote for him. He just loses my vote. If Chafee makes it through I'll vote for him over Rand. I'll hold my nose doing it but I will. Honestly neither is going to win and Rand will end up losing his supporters to a neocon like Ted Cruz. Chafee is the only one educating the public on foreign policy. I think Ron Paul had something to do with the Iran deal. He brought in fresh air and Obama ran with it and made peace with Cuba and Iran.

I'll be voting in the Republican primary because I have a really good congressman (he so happens to have a subforum here), keeping him in office is my number one priority. I'll probably write his name in. I wish he was running for President. He would be perfect. I'll be rooting for Chafee for President. I hope he gains traction to put pressure on Hillary and Sanders so a pro-American foreign policy becomes an issue again this election season.

Did you vote for Obama in the general election?

 

[Sola_Fide]

Did you vote for Obama in the general election?

Sure he probably did. Obama was the "anti-war" candidate remember?

 

[RJB]

Maybe Chafee will win the Nobel Peace Prize as well for street cred, and if we continue to elect peaceful presidents like Obama and Chafee who "deescalate" these wars, we should have world peace by the time the sun implodes.

 

[Rad]

Sure he probably did. Obama was the "anti-war" candidate remember?

Nope, Obama was a liar. The NIE on Iran in 2007 said Iran wasn't pursuing nukes. Obama was on stage like Rand now and the rest lying his little heart out. He also supported the destruction of our civil liberties in regard to the FISA bill. He also bailed out the banks. Now if I knew that he would make peace with Iran I would have voted for him but he was just a liar like everyone else on stage except for Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel. I never have voted in the general election in my life. I may never do so for President. My senators are crap and will always be crap. I just recently got a decent congressman (thanks to relocating).

 

[Rad]

Maybe Chafee will win the Nobel Peace Prize as well for street cred, and if we continue to elect peaceful presidents like Obama and Chafee who "deescalate" these wars, we should have world peace by the time the sun implodes.

I know man. I think the economy will go down first. Empires have a way of ending badly.

 

[Rad]

One final post (unless there are replies by Dondero Libertarians) with a link to an article highlighting the foreign policies of the Democrat candidates. http://www.eurasiareview.com/140820...-democratic-presidential-candidates-analysis/

 

[Sola_Fide]

Nope, Obama was a liar. The NIE on Iran in 2007 said Iran wasn't pursuing nukes. Obama was on stage like Rand now and the rest lying his little heart out. He also supported the destruction of our civil liberties in regard to the FISA bill. He also bailed out the banks. Now if I knew that he would make peace with Iran I would have voted for him but he was just a liar like everyone else on stage except for Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel. I never have voted in the general election in my life. I may never do so for President. My senators are crap and will always be crap. I just recently got a decent congressman (thanks to relocating).

Ooooh you mean Rand isn't a total non interventionist? No one here knew that. Thanks for enlightening us.

 

[Rad]

Ooooh you mean Rand isn't a total non interventionist? No one here knew that. Thanks for enlightening us.

He is a liar. He failed when it mattered.