What really, really pisses me off, is the treatment from conservative talk show hosts and columnists.
My sentiments exactly. It's because the military personal's over-whelming support for Dr. Paul makes these talk show hosts look like complete idiots. They're always blabbering on and on about how much they support the troops....they bend-over backwards trying to convey the impression the troops are right in-sync with their "let's get in all the wars we can" attitude, especially Hannity. So Dr Paul's Non-Interventionist foreign policy's popularity with the troops destroys this facade.
Here's a letter I wrote Mark Levin following a call I'd made to his program after he trashed Ron Paul for an hour:
Hello Mark,
I don't normally listen to your radio program after hearing you sporadically some time ago as you've clearly proven you're a tool for the political establishment. However, I happened to catch your Ron Paul rant so I stayed to listen and later call. Like other talk show hosts of your ilk you prefer to seek out Liberal callers to feast upon when you want a debate. Given the inherent ideological flaws and contradictions of Liberalism even the most articulate Liberal's arguments are easily taken apart and rightly so. You'll never allow a well-spoken Libertarian Conservative caller with a dissenting view to engage in any substantive discussion and that was my experience with you this evening after an hour and a half hold, with one cut-off in between.
Your attacks on Ron Paul this evening twisted his positions on foreign policy and the were also personal in nature. I believe you called him a " little cowardly weasel" or similar. You said he insults our troops. That's an interesting point in itself which deserves discussion. Are you that uninformed to not be aware Ron Paul receives more campaign contributions from military service members than all the other GOP candidates combined? Evidently, they're not too offended.
You also parrot the talk show puppet talking points by deliberately trying to blunt any discussion of the role American foreign policy may have played in endangering the American public to terrorist attacks such as occurred on 9/11. Anyone who tries to have a dispassionate discussion of the 9/11 attack by including an examination of the US government's foreign policy is immediately ripped by shrill talk show hosts for "blaming America". Nothing could be further from the truth.
The role of the Federal government is not to police the world, settle every country's squabbles, and provide Universal Military Care to the entire planet. Ron Paul is a firm believer in the constitutional mandate for the Federal government to provide for the defense of AMERICA, not a foreign country/countries Mark Levin happens to think should be defended. On that note Mark, no one is stopping you from donating your money to a country you think needs help or volunteering to fight on their behalf. Ron Paul would be your staunchest supporter of your right to do so as you please in that regard. You're generous with other people's money and brave with other people's blood when it comes to foreign policy.
Meddling in other country's conflicts by our Federal government only creates enemies unnecessarily which endangers the American people's security. This is exactly the opposite of what the constitution intends which is to defend AMERICAN citizens, not put them in jeopardy. Incidently Mark, in case you missed one of the many times Ron Paul has pointed it out; we're BROKE, get it? When the Federal government is already 15 plus Trillion in debt we simply can't continue wasting additional Billions/Trillions butting into other countries problems, making them our problems and creating our own enemies. It's called blow-back and it doesn't have anything to do with whether we were on the right or wrong side of someone else's conflict.
The Federal government's meddling abroad not only endangers the American public's safety and contributes heavily to our debt, the latter also makes it impossible to dismantle the welfare state at home. The hypocrisy of spending Trillions abroad on war and foreign aid gives the Liberals a perfect argument to fight even the most minor domestic spending cuts. In that regard, your attempt to equate Ron Paul's constitutionally sound position on national defense to a Liberal/McGovern anti-war stance is feeble, insulting, and only makes you appear foolish. McGovern's anti-war motives are entirely different from Paul's. A Liberal wouldn't advocate re-deploying our troops from guarding the Pakistan/Afghanistan border to guarding our own Southern border. Nor would a Liberal cut ALL foreign aid as Ron Paul advocates.
As a shill for the status quot hugging Republican Establishment you better wake-up and smell the coffee Mark. The American public is not going to buy the lesser-of-two-evils scam anymore as seen with the McCain fiasco. I'm a life-long Libertarian who voted for Ron Paul back in 1988. In 2000 I decided to go along with the Republican Establishment and again in 2004 to see what they would accomplish. So I held my nose and voted for Bush and you can see how that worked-out. If the Republican Establishment once again nominates one of it's RINO's, it will be their own undoing so don't blame Ron Paul for running third party. By the way, you ridiculed Paul's conservative credentials which is quite ignorant. Ron Paul has the most conservative voting record in Congress since statistics have been kept on that subject dating back to the 1930's.
Furthermore, the Libertarian Conservatives are the wave of the future no matter how hard the Political Establishment pulls your strings Mark, and this is what terrifies all of you. Young people are among Ron Paul's most fervent supporters. Despite the best efforts of the government/media complex to quell discussion of Libertarian ideals the message is getting through thanks in large part to Ron Paul's efforts. It's important to point out Mark, that Ron Paul is only the messenger of Libertarian ideals. When you demean and insult his positions on issues you are actually attacking Libertarian Conservatives. The Republican Establishment welcomes Libertarian-leaning Conservatives into the tent as long as they vote for RINO's. After enduring all the Republican Establishment RINO's: Bush1, Dole, Bush2, and McCain it's time to let the Libertarian Conservatives have their shot.
Sincerely,
