Va GOP Primary choice: Anti-gun Romney or bat-crazy Paul

45acpForMe said:

I do agree with Tfred about Paul not understanding jihad and their desire to create a world wide caliphate as well as their eschatology.

Click to expand...

but....the video....did you watch it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8NhRPo0WAo

Another huge supporter of Ron Paul here.

Ron Paul 2012!!

Schlitz said:

but....the video....did you watch it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8NhRPo0WAo

Click to expand...

Yes I watched it and it shows that Ron Paul still thinks they are just mad at us because of our policies and intervention.

The muslims by their religion yearn for the house of islam to take over and control the whole world. Their prophecies for the mahdi match the biblical prophecies for the anti-christ very closely (both reign for 7 years, kill jews).

A moderate muslim believes those things will happen "eventually" whereas a radical believes they will happen "soon" with their help.

Iran's leaders have said that they are willing to commit national suicide if it will bring the mahdi back. So Mutual Assured Destruction is not something that will work with islam like it did the soviet union.

45acpForMe said:

Yes I watched it and it shows that Ron Paul still thinks they are just mad at us because of our policies and intervention.

Click to expand...

So you DON'T think they're still mad about that? You think it is 110% purely religion? You think the fact that we've been over there for decades has nothing to do with it?

Like I said before, if Iran is such a huge threat congress can declare war and Ron Paul supports their ability to do so. Write your representatives and tell them you want a war, we shouldn't be choosing presidents based off of if they will go to war on their own deciding.

Ron Paul agrees, Iran getting a nuke is dangerous.

TFred said:

But just to stay on track, this post is about the fact that the other contenders are not even going to be on the ballot. That is simply wrong.

TFred

Click to expand...

The ones who did got it wrong. Don't follow the rules. Don't get on the ballot. Seems like a pretty simple concept. It's not as if VA said they don't want them on the ballot. If they had tried and done it right they'd be on the ballot.

If you're gonna be mad, be mad at the right thing - at the candidates that screwed up.

Steeler-gal said:

The ones who did got it wrong. Don't follow the rules. Don't get on the ballot. Seems like a pretty simple concept. It's not as if VA said they don't want them on the ballot. If they had tried and done it right they'd be on the ballot.

If you're gonna be mad, be mad at the right thing - at the candidates that screwed up.

Click to expand...

I think it's funny...because I don't like either of the candidates that didn't make it. However if it was my candidate of preference I'd be upset with THEM, not VA.

Schlitz said:

So you DON'T think they're still mad about that? You think it is 110% purely religion? You think the fact that we've been over there for decades has nothing to do with it?

Like I said before, if Iran is such a huge threat congress can declare war and Ron Paul supports their ability to do so. Write your representatives and tell them you want a war, we shouldn't be choosing presidents based off of if they will go to war on their own deciding.

Ron Paul agrees, Iran getting a nuke is dangerous.

Click to expand...

No I think it is probably 80-90% religion and the other 10-20% political.

I agree that the constitutional way to declare war is fine and propper. I just wish Ron Paul understood the religious aspect of the problem to give me more confidence in how he would handle foreign policy.

I agree with Ron Paul in many ways and would vote for him over most of the other Republican candidates. Iowa will be very interesting to see if he can pull out a win and have the media totally ignore that!!! ;-)

TFred said:

Cold war was apples and oranges. The Soviets didn't want to die any more than we do. You can't make that same claim for the Iranians. In fact they WANT to die... to bring their end-times to pass.

You can love Ron Paul all you want to. He will never be president of the United States. To support him is to support the reelection of Obama. It's that simple. The sad fact is that the "muddle in the middle" of the ideological spectrum are now who choose the president. Ron Paul will never win that vote.

TFred

Click to expand...

1) If you believe that the Iranians would willingly bring about an end to thousands of years of Persian civilization, you watch too much Fox News, listen to too much Beck, have no understanding of Islam other than what you have been told by your demagogues, and are, quite simply, a gullible idiot.

2) Obama is bad, no doubt. However, the current crop of Republicans, much like their predecessors, are no better. We will still be in unnecessary wars, the PATRIOT Act and other limitations on freedom will still be vigorously supported, and Constitutional government will never return to this nation. In fact, I would rather suffer through four more years of Obama than allow simpleton "conservatives" like yourself to become complacent due to the election of a Gingrich or Romney. That's what happened with George W. Bush, and look where that got us.

In short, shove off.

P.S.: Merry Christmas to you and yours.

UtahRSO said:

Ron Paul is so crazy it makes my eyes cross. I think he'd make a worse president than Obama (and that's saying a lot)! Someone made the comment (and it's true), if Ron Paul had been the President in 1941, he never would have let Congress declare war against Hitler's crew. My candidates would be Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann, and Santorum, in that order. If Huntsman were the Repub. Candidate, I'd probably hold my nose and vote for him. But if Ron Paul were the candidate against Obama, I'd probably not vote.

Click to expand...

Thank you for espousing a fundamental misunderstanding of history that is so typical of those who share your misguided opinions. We did not declare war on Hitler; we declared war on Japan after FDR did everything he could to provoke them into an attack. The court version of history is not always the correct one.

Ron Paul would have done everything he could to have kept us out of war, because he's not beholden to the military-industrial complex, something that another beloved Republican warned us about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

"[America] [FONT=Times,Times New Roman]goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. [/FONT][FONT=Times,Times New Roman] She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times,Times New Roman] She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times,Times New Roman] She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times,Times New Roman] She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times,Times New Roman] The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.... [/FONT]
[FONT=Times,Times New Roman] She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.... [/FONT]
[FONT=Times,Times New Roman] [America's] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice."

-John Quincy Adams, 1821
[/FONT]

45acpForMe said:

No I think it is probably 80-90% religion and the other 10-20% political.

I agree that the constitutional way to declare war is fine and propper. I just wish Ron Paul understood the religious aspect of the problem to give me more confidence in how he would handle foreign policy.

I agree with Ron Paul in many ways and would vote for him over most of the other Republican candidates. Iowa will be very interesting to see if he can pull out a win and have the media totally ignore that!!! ;-)

Click to expand...

If you believe the problem is religious, than the only logical solution is to exterminate all the followers of that religion. However, this is clearly unacceptable for moral, philosophical, and practical reasons.

The thinking man realizes that many religions, including Judaism and Christianity, contain calls to treat those of other faiths as lesser beings, and even to kill them in some cases. The thinking man also recognizes that the majority of modern followers of these religions do not buy into that. Finally, he accepts that even if a small minority of believers are radicalized, from a practical standpoint, their capabilities for destruction are limited, provided that we do not expose ourselves (i.e. voluntarily put brave young and women in harm's way, in an unstable part of the world, for no pressing national interest).

Point of information: Iran has not started a war in over two centuries. They have never been colonized (the only country in the region to make that claim), and never launched foreign invasions.

They want to keep it that way.

I salute the Virginia GOP for following the rules. In the 2008 general election, The Libertarian Party ticket of Barr/Root was the only candidate legally qualified for the Texas ballot. Texas put McCain and Obama on the ballot anyway. The LP sued, and the Texas Surpreme Court ignored the law and threw out the suit without even a word of explanation.

At least Virginia is following the law here.

ManInBlack said:

If you believe the problem is religious, than the only logical solution is to exterminate all the followers of that religion. However, this is clearly unacceptable for moral, philosophical, and practical reasons.

The thinking man realizes that many religions, including Judaism and Christianity, contain calls to treat those of other faiths as lesser beings, and even to kill them in some cases. The thinking man also recognizes that the majority of modern followers of these religions do not buy into that. Finally, he accepts that even if a small minority of believers are radicalized, from a practical standpoint, their capabilities for destruction are limited, provided that we do not expose ourselves (i.e. voluntarily put brave young and women in harm's way, in an unstable part of the world, for no pressing national interest).

Click to expand...

Hmmm how do I say this without breaking forum rules...... you're no thinking man!

First of all yes islam is not a valid religion, it is a political system derived to control the muslims entire life. It tells them how to pray, how to eat, wash and piss (not toward mecca). It came into being from a man who took direction from some spiritual being that conflicted with biblical evidence that had been around for hundreds/thousands of years. There are parts of their system that may seem good like not drinking alcohol but it is still proveably false.

There is another example of a religion that was terminated (mostly by Christians). During the second world war Japan worshipped their Emporer as a god. Their soldiers (who would be considered radical, the majority, and capable of more than limited destruction) swore oaths to fight to the death to defend their country and god-king. When we won that fight (as horrible as it was) part of the surrender process was to announce (truthfully) that their emporer was not a god. That religion died that day. So we can destroy a false religion without killing all its followers we simply have to cut off the head of the snake. If Israel ever nukes mecca we will see how long islam continues.

So don't put us off with some intelligent sounding "thinking man" atheist jargon. Your grasp of history seems to be taken from politically correct sound bites from the lame stream media.

I would feel much better voting for Ron Paul if he showed an inkling that he understood the above.

KBCraig said:

Point of information: Iran has not started a war in over two centuries. They have never been colonized (the only country in the region to make that claim), and never launched foreign invasions.

They want to keep it that way.

I salute the Virginia GOP for following the rules. In the 2008 general election, The Libertarian Party ticket of Barr/Root was the only candidate legally qualified for the Texas ballot. Texas put McCain and Obama on the ballot anyway. The LP sued, and the Texas Surpreme Court ignored the law and threw out the suit without even a word of explanation.

At least Virginia is following the law here.

Click to expand...

They fund and support Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria and to some degree Al Queda. They mainly (smartly) use proxies to do their dirty work so they can have some reasonable deniability in responsibility.

The medes and persians overthrew Babylon a long time ago so I would consider that a foreign invasion.

TFred said:

You can't make that same claim for the Iranians. In fact they WANT to die... to bring their end-times to pass.

Click to expand...

Oh, you mean sort of like the Christian Apocolyptic NeoCons, and their belief that they can immanentize the eschaton by starting a World War in the Middle East?...

45acpForMe said:

They fund and support Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria and to some degree Al Queda. They mainly (smartly) use proxies to do their dirty work so they can have some reasonable deniability in responsibility.

The medes and persians overthrew Babylon a long time ago so I would consider that a foreign invasion.

Click to expand...

Actually, Hammas was started and continues to be supported by covert operations lead by Mossad.

In fact you will find that MOST of the "Islamic extremist" groups have been funded, trained, and whipped into anti-Western frenzies by Western governments and intelligence groups, if you do your homework.

In other words, when the "military industrial complex" points its finger at "Islamic Extremists" as the largest threat to our way of life, we all need to remember that they have three more fingers pointing back at themselves...

45acpForMe said:

...My first pick was Michelle Bachman but I actually signed a Herman Cain petition to get him on the ballot at a Hampton gun show...

Click to expand...

This quote is very telling about your political views. I'll leave it at that...

45acpForMe said:

They mainly (smartly) use proxies to do their dirty work so they can have some reasonable deniability in responsibility.

Click to expand...

Sort of like how the CIA and DOD did in the late 1970s and early 1980s when they created, funded, trained, and equipped the Mujahideen to fight against the Soviets?

If you were even a marginally competent student of history, you would be starting to realize that the only difference between the current government of Iran and the US government of the last 50 years is the color of their skin and the amount of vowels in their last names. Ideologically, they are essentially the same--the Ruling Class has ONE agenda, no matter WHAT flag they fly--they just want to see the world burn for their own amusement...

Wake up, dude. The biggest threat to America is--and HAS been for nearly 100 years--the 1/10 of 1%, and these are people who have no loyalty to ANY nation, race, or creed, and are ONLY concerned with the sociopathic drive to establish their own dynastic perpetuity...

45acpForMe said:

Yes I watched it and it shows that Ron Paul still thinks they are just mad at us because of our policies and intervention.

The muslims by their religion yearn for the house of islam to take over and control the whole world. Their prophecies for the mahdi match the biblical prophecies for the anti-christ very closely (both reign for 7 years, kill jews).

A moderate muslim believes those things will happen "eventually" whereas a radical believes they will happen "soon" with their help.

Iran's leaders have said that they are willing to commit national suicide if it will bring the mahdi back. So Mutual Assured Destruction is not something that will work with islam like it did the soviet union.

Click to expand...

Please provide a cite for this. And if you're going to quote MSM with the "wipe Israel off the map" quotes don't bother. That is a gross mistranslation that has been perpetuated far too much already.

I will be voting for Ron Paul in our primary. However , if he doesn't win the nomination , I will vote for whichever Republican does. Not only do we have to worry about how the country is run , we also have to worry about what kind of people might be chosen for replacements on the SCOTUS.



If Obama wins another 4 years and gets to appoint 1 or even 2 new justices , our freedoms will be completely gone .