Tagged: Ron Paul Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • just a conservative girl 8:31 PM on 08/25/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: crazy, Ron Paul   

    This Left Me Speechless – There is This Much Crazy in the World 

     
    • Ednar 8:57 PM on 08/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Last look at the weather today …
      Hurricane Isaacs boundaries will miss Tampa, Florida at Monday 2:05 P.M.
      It will be close but it will miss.
      Then again, it behooves me to see science this accurate!
      Just UNBELIEVABLE! Hopefully, it is accurate!
      I would LOVE to see & hear all the great American Patriots at this convention giving their all to save our country from this demagogue despot in the White House.
      Isaac will end up in the Gulf of Mexico.
      Wonder if HAARP is responsible for some earthquakes in Iran!

      A Marine’s wife says it all:
      I sat, as did millions of other Americans & watched as the government underwent a peaceful transition of power few months ago. At 1st, I felt a swell of pride & patriotism while Barack Obama took his Oath of office. However, all that pride quickly vanished as I later watched 21 Marines, in full dress uniform w/rifles, fire a 21-gun salute to the President. It was then that I realized how far America’s Military had deteriorated. Every last 1 of them missed.

    • Don 9:33 PM on 08/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

      The man in this video needs to be more careful, I thought I heard the whir of black helicopters in the background…

    • signpainterguy 12:05 PM on 08/26/2012 Permalink | Reply

      After Katrina, a very-lib friend told me he honestly believed that Bush and Wolfowitz used top secret gov. tech. to form the hurricane and steered it over New Orleans. He and another friend (who has now seen the light) were unaware that Ray “School Bus” Nagan and Gov. Blanko sat on their hands for days while people suffered, refusing to allow relief agencies to come in and help. They were also unaware that Bush had issued a State of Emergency while Katrina was still over Southern Florida to give those agencies time to stage outside the danger zone. It was easier and more fun apparently to believe the worst about Bush than consider the evil and ineptitude of dummycrats !

    • signpainterguy 12:53 PM on 08/26/2012 Permalink | Reply

      There`s an expression, “The chances of your being seen doing something stupid are directly proportional to the stupidity of your action”. That implies that you never intended for anyone to see you being stupid. What does it say about someone who intentionally puts it on YouTube for ALL to see ?

      STUPID beyond words ?

  • just a conservative girl 10:33 PM on 03/20/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , mcdonell, , , , , Ron Paul, , vp stakes,   

    Romney Wins Big – Let the VP Stakes Begin 

    First, I take no pleasure whatsoever saying this.  Romney will be the GOP nominee.  Santorum has run out of field.  There are not enough truly conservative states left to get him to the nomination.  Of course he will keep going in the hopes of a contested convention, but in their hearts of hearts they know it is not in the cards.

    Therefore, it is time.  VP Stakes:

    There are plenty to choose from.

    Herman Cain: I don’t see it.  The issues that came up about the affair would scare off any candidate in my mind.  Why deal with that distraction when you don’t have to?  I give this almost no chance.

    Paul Ryan: A great choice, but very young.  He also has very young children who he doesn’t want to put into the spotlight at their tender ages.  Which just makes me love him all the more.  Also, very remote chance of this happening.

    Chris Christie:  This is a non-starter as far as I am concerned.  I like many things about Christie, but he adds nothing to the ticket.  He won’t bring NJ over to the GOP.  He is just as moderate as Romney is in most respects.  So I give this almost no chance.

    Michele Bachman: She will excite the base, but let’s be honest; she is a loose cannon.  Romney won’t take the chance of her blowing his last chance at being president.

    Marco Rubio: He is dynamic and from a swing state.  He had a great deal of tea party support.  Notice I said had.  There are many in the Tea Party who have lost confidence in him.  He has some issues with a brother-in-law who has had some drug dealing issues.  Of course that has nothing to do with him, he didn’t marry the guy, but the media will have some fun with that.  He also has said that he has zero intention of taking it even if offered.  Of course much easier to say no to a reporter than to the nominee.  He is also young.  He may feel he isn’t ready yet.   I would give this a 50/50 chance.

    Allen West: West has been favorable towards Newt, although he never came out and endorsed him.  West has the entire package that the conservative base is looking for.  He will make an excellent attack dog on the stump.  He will pull no punches with Obama, which will allow Romney to stay above the fray and concentrate on comparing and contrasting policies with the Obama administration.  West had some issues in Iraq that will come up again.  He sometimes doesn’t always filter what he is saying.  He also just moved in order to run for congress again.  I would give this maybe a 40% chance.

    Sarah Palin: Heaven knows she has been vetted.  But she is also very polarizing.  I also don’t think she would accept.  Why be the small dog again when she had the chance to run for the big seat and decided to bow out?  I give this less than a 20% chance.

    Rand Paul: I like Rand.  A lot as a matter of fact.  He also is another that will take on Obama without fear.  His down side is that it will add fuel to the fire to the people who accused Romney and Ron Paul of working together and Rand getting the VP seat as the payoff.  It will alienate the people who believe this.  But, it may bring in Ron Paul fans.  Not likely, but some may be willing to vote for him.  I would say this is about a 30% chance.

    I don’t see him taking any of the candidates he went up against.  The blood between Newt and him is way to bad for it to be repaired.  It looks like it is starting to get that way with Rick now as well.  I would give this the least likely of the scenarios.

    My pick is Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia.  He is currently the head of the RGA.  Has a rising profile nationally.  He has spoken at the Reagan library recently and was received well.  His administration has been very successful.  He has increased revenues without raising taxes, VA’s ratings has increased under his administration, he has kept most of his promises when he was elected, (one more year to fulfill the balance).  He is also a very good campaigner.  He is a staunch conservative, which Romney needs to excite the base.  Virginia is a swing state, and right now is trending to Obama by 8 points with Romney as the nominee.  (Which Romney was the best of the remaining candidates).

     

    Your predictions?

     
    • signpainterguy 11:03 PM on 03/20/2012 Permalink | Reply

      With Romney only just past 1/3 of the way to 1,440 delegates required to garner the nomination, you might at least “consider” that you could be jumping the gun a bit early. Santorum has already surprised the “experts” ! Much can happen and I pray it will ! I do not want Rombama !

      Alan West would fill the VP bill for me.

      Marco Rubio just may be ineligible as his parents were not citizens at the time of his birth; IF I understand it correctly. A shame; I like his brand of conservatism !

      • just a conservative girl 6:58 AM on 03/21/2012 Permalink | Reply

        There is no viable path to the nomination for anyone but Romney. You have to remember a few things, starting April 1 most states become winner takes all. You also have to look at many of the states that are left, Maryland, CT, CA, are not going to vote for Santorum. Where he does well is where they are large numbers of evangelicals. He also still has places where he is not even on the ballot; DC for instance. He also has issues with delegates in PA. He has very few delegates that he can win in that state, even though he will more than likely win the state.

        It is over. Romney is the nominee. Rick had to have IL last night to have any kind of chance and he fell way short.

        Cubans back in the 60’s were given citizenship very quickly. He may very well have been born to citizens. Also, the court has never ruled on what Natural Born Citizen means. I admire your consistency in the matter though. I have read quite a few people going after Santorum as well.

        • signpainterguy 5:05 PM on 03/21/2012 Permalink | Reply

          As I said, Santorum won some states the experts said he wouldn`t; I`m not giving up on him !

          Article 2, Section 1 of the US Constitution is clear enough on what constitutes a Natural Born Citizen; a person born on US lands to parents who are citizens. Notice “parents” is plural; meaning, not one parent or the other, but BOTH ! THAT makes Obama ineligible. IF Cubans were given immediate(ish) citizenship, then there`s probably no issue with Rubio`s NBC status ! That would be good !

    • Joe 3:27 AM on 03/21/2012 Permalink | Reply

      If you any understanding of math Rick has lost. He’s beginning to embarass himself. If Mitt picks Rand and flips the NADA hes got my vote.

    • fuzislippers 5:17 PM on 03/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Great post. Romney needs two things: foreign policy cred and TEA Party support. Make that three things, actually, because he needs to reach out to minorities, too.

      For these reasons, the short list for the Romney campaign probably includes Rubio, Jindal, and West. No way in hell is either Palin or Bachmann on it, but they may be stupid enough to consider Christie or Rand Paul. I doubt he’s thinking Ryan as Ryan’s strength is the economy and budget (the same as Romney’s purported strengths). Ryan would add to a Santorum ticket, not Romney’s. I’d love to see him pick Herman Cain, but seriously doubt it’s even a distant thought. My pick is Colonel West.

      There is a chance that he’ll go with Nicki Haley, a smart choice for the women’s/minority vote, but I wouldn’t put money on that one.

      • just a conservative girl 6:03 PM on 03/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

        The reason that I think he will go McDonnell over West is that Romney is a play it safe kind of guy and West is very bold choice. I am not sure he is that bold.

        • fuzislippers 6:18 PM on 03/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

          I like McDonnell, but he adds nothing to the Romney ticket. He’d balance an unhinged Newt, tho. ;)

          • just a conservative girl 6:45 PM on 03/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

            Well A. Newt won’t be the nominee (much to your happiness I am sure;}) and B. he can’t take McDonnell anyway. They are from the same state. You are right, West adds a great deal, but I still think it is a little more bold than Romney is willing to go.

            • fuzislippers 6:50 PM on 03/25/2012 Permalink | Reply

              Oh Romney will all but sell his soul for a political win. He proved that in 1994.

  • just a conservative girl 3:57 PM on 03/16/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: benton, , Ron Paul   

    Quote of the Day – Jesse Benton Edition 

    “A brokered convention is now our stated goal, and winning the nomination for Dr. Paul at said convention will require extensive politicking.”

    Jesse Benton, Campaign Manager, Ron Paul for President

    Be careful what you wish for.  He has people organized all over the country to be the delegates at the national election.  They will be voters for a second ballot and just as importantly, they will be voting on the planks of the platform that the candidate will be running on and defending.  We could see a GOP Party plank that does not contain pro-life language.

     
    • SignPainterGuy 5:09 PM on 03/16/2012 Permalink | Reply

      It would likely have no intelligent National Security or Foreign Policy ideas either !

  • just a conservative girl 10:50 PM on 02/28/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Ron Paul   

    Quote of the Day – Ron Paul Edition 

    “The last thing I’ve done is talk to Mitt Romney. Besides he wouldn’t talk to me about that. That’s just fiction and its mostly been promoted by I guess by somebody who’s super involved in conspiracy theories. That’s Santorum doing that but it doesn’t make any sense at all that that would be the case. And, my son can take care of himself.”

    Congressman Paul addressing the rumors that he is working with Mitt Romney behind the scenes – the payoff being a VP slot for his son Rand.

    Who is it that spends all that time on the radio with Alex Jones?  Yeah, I think that is Ron Paul.

     
  • just a conservative girl 10:47 PM on 01/01/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Ron Paul   

    Video – Jon Huntsman Hits Ron Paul with Twilight Zone Label 

    I have actually enjoyed many of the Huntsman Videos.  I will miss them when he drops out shortly.

     
    • Beowulf 1:34 AM on 01/02/2012 Permalink | Reply

      Huntsman, alongside Gary Johnson, are the most successful GOP candidates among their peers in this nomination season.

      Rather than wax lyrical about what they will do, these two men have actually led their states successfully, and are both conservatives at heart; though to some, they remain not conservative enough – some mighty bloggers even accuse them of being liberals, leading to the sheeps also labeling them as such.

      I simply do not understand why these two men are not given the time of day, and have to suffer the indignity of being overshadowed by talkers like Santorum, Newt, Bachmann, Palin, DeMint, etc.

      Is the GOP looking for the best candidates, or are they looking for an antonym of Obama?

      • just a conservative girl 10:30 PM on 01/02/2012 Permalink | Reply

        I am not sure about Johnson, but I think that Huntsman would have been a very viable candidate in another cycle. But this cycle is very much guided by the grassroots and Huntsman’s working for Obama is something that the grassroots didn’t look kindly upon.

  • just a conservative girl 1:21 PM on 01/01/2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: kirchick, , Ron Paul   

    Quote of the Day – Jamie Kirchick Edition 

    Paul’s following is closely linked with the peculiar attractions of the libertarian creed that he promotes. Libertarianism is an ideology rather than a philosophy of government—its main selling point is not its pragmatic usefulness, but its inviolable consistency. In that way, Paul’s indulgence of bigotry—he says he did not write the newsletters but rather allowed others to do so in his name—isn’t an incidental departure from his libertarianism, but a tidy expression of its priorities: First principles of market economics gain credence over all considerations of social empathy and historical acuity. His fans are guilty of donning the same ideological blinders, giving their support to a political candidate on account of the theories he declaims, rather than the judgment he shows in applying those theories, or the character he has evinced in living them. Voters for Ron Paul are privileging logical consistency at the expense of moral fitness.

    But it’s not simply that Paul’s supporters are ignoring the manifest evidence of his moral failings. More fundamentally, their very awareness of such failings is crowded out by the atmosphere of outright fervor that pervades Paul’s candidacy. This is not the fervor of a healthy body politic—this is a less savory type of political devotion, one that escapes the bounds of sober reasoning. Indeed, Paul’s absolutist notion of libertarian rigor has always been coupled with an attraction to fantasies of political apocalypse.

    Jamie Kirchick of The New Republic

    There are many things that I like about Ron Paul’s stances.  I most certainly have a streak of liberation in me.  Sometimes that streak is bigger than at other times.  But like the author, I view libertarianism not as a form of government, but a personal way of living your life and how you vote.

    I despise and mock any politician that is surrounded by a cult of personality.  We have had way too much of that in the past four years.  Politicians are (thankfully) not gods, miracle workers, nor do they have a magic wand.  The process back to a limited constitutional government will be long, slow and painstaking.  It is up to us to continue to pay attention no matter who is in office.

     
  • just a conservative girl 4:37 PM on 11/17/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , quiz, , Ron Paul   

    Not Sure Who to Support in the Republican Primary? A Quick Quiz 

    You can take this short quiz to see who you match up with. Apparently I am more of a Paul fan than I ever thought.  He is coming out as my top pick with Michele Bachmann in second and Rick Perry in third.

     

    Maybe I am just a liberation girl instead?

     
    • zillaoftheresistance 6:24 AM on 11/18/2011 Permalink | Reply

      I got Michelle Bachmann, followed closely by Herman Cain with Newt in third. Reason magazine has a much longer quiz which matched me up with Newt.
      I notice Rick Santorum was not in this newest quiz, his anti-jihad/anti-sharia and anti-invader views closely match my own, but his temperament has really put me of as of late. Cain’s campaign keeps killing itself, and he is still weak on foreign issues and jihad, Bachmann is polling nearly as badly as Santorum these days, so it looks like I’m gonna be cheering for Newt to beat mittens. Legal Insurrection has a recent post that makes the case for Newt over mittens, and I agree with it.

      • just a conservative girl 8:30 AM on 11/18/2011 Permalink | Reply

        If I took Paul out of the mix I ended up with Bachmann first, Perry second, and Newt third. I put Paul in the mix just to see. I agree with Paul on most of his domestic issues, it is foreign policy where he loses me.

        • zillaoftheresistance 10:10 AM on 11/18/2011 Permalink | Reply

          That’s where he loses most people, and with good reason. Even so, he’d still be better than Obama, any of the GOP hopefuls would (even the ones I truly do not like).

          • signpainterguy 4:05 PM on 11/18/2011 Permalink | Reply

            Even Huntsman would be better than Oblamer !

            • just a conservative girl 4:48 PM on 11/18/2011 Permalink | Reply

              Are you sure? He seems pretty progressive from what little I know about him.

              • signpainterguy 1:27 PM on 11/19/2011 Permalink | Reply

                I hear ya, but “pretty progressive” is better (even if just an itsy bitsy teeny tiny little bit) than the lying marxist-socialist America-hating muslim Obozo !

  • just a conservative girl 9:25 AM on 08/13/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , mccotter, , , Ron Paul, , straw poll   

    Ames Straw Poll Predications 

    Michele Bachmann will win by a small margin

    Ron Paul will come in second or third.  He is an expert at getting people to vote in straw polls

    Mitt Romney will do better than most people think. 

    Herman Cain will place in the top 6, but it will not be enough to give him the momentum he needs to raise his profile and much-needed cash

    Pawlenty really hurt himself the other night and he fill finish very poorly and will be dropping out of the race before the real vote is cast

    Gingrich will finish close to the bottom, he won’t be too far behind Pawlenty in calling it a day

    Huntsman won’t even register

    Rick Perry will have a very good showing even though he is a write in

    Sarah Palin will do remarkably well for someone who has not announced her candidacy

    Santorum I think will do better than originally predicted, he had a good showing at the debate last night, he is also beloved by social conservatives for his strong and outspoken voice for the voiceless on abortion

    McCotter may actually have a bit of an impact in the poll.  He has a wonderful dry sense of humor and is a Midwesterner  Some votes of his are suspect, but overall a good solid conservative

    I read in the paper today what the candidates are serving in their tents – i.e Cain is serving Godfather Pizza of course, Bachmann is doing B-B-Q and Funnel Cake, Paul wouldn’t announce what he was serving, but the funniest part is that almost every candidate is having Mike Huckabee playing his bass.  He will be making the rounds for the party tomorrow in Ames – I suppose he need to fill his one hour show on Fox

    Who do you think will win? 

     

     
    • SignPainterGuy 5:51 PM on 08/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

      If the current trend holds sway, Ron Paul will continue to win, though it makes no sense to me whatsoever ! The poll cards were surely printed by someone from deep inside the Twilight Zone !

      If I look at the view of the pundits after the debate, Romney will win, but again, how does someone win by virtue of simply “not losing” ? That`s the best I can say about his performance, because his debate responses were middling at best.

      Who do I want to win ? Cain, Santorum and then Bachmann, in that order. They`re the only candidates who have at heart what America really needs !

      Who do I think actually WILL win ? There are too many variables at play for me even to try to guess.

  • just a conservative girl 8:45 PM on 08/12/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , Ron Paul   

    The GOP Debate – My View 

    Most people more than likely could care less what I think, but since I blog I am going to put it out there anyway. 

    The overall grades –

    A- to Rick Santorum.  To me hands down he won the night.  Now, I don’t think it will change the fact that he has little to no chance of getting the nomination, but he did very well.  He can very proud of his performance. 

    B+ Mitt Romney.  He walked away unscathed, which I am sure was his goal for the night.  Iowa is going to be very difficult for him to win.  But I am going to downgrade him to a B- because the truth is he didn’t answer many questions, he did a great deal of evading.

    B- Herman Cain – I think Herman did very well through most of it.  He got a little defensive with Chris Wallace when asked about some of his Fox News Sunday appearances.  But, he laid out some specifics on certain things, something he has not done much of in the past.  But he needed to hit it out of the park to give himself a better chance in the Straw Poll on Saturday.  He did not accomplish that. 

    C Michele Bachmann – She didn’t do as well in this debate as she did in the last.  She too was a little defensive on certain items.  The back and forth with Pawlenty I think actually hurt her.  She should have taken the high road and instead punched back.  Some found it refreshing, I personally found it rude.  She was asked a question about her husband’s role in her White House.  Many found it to be unfair, again I am in the minority and didn’t find the question unfair.  It wasn’t all that different from the questions we were asking about Bill Clinton’s role in a Hillary White House.  Spouses talk to each other about their jobs, it isn’t unreasonable to question what type of role that spouse will play.  I personally don’t want an activist spouse, as they were not elected. 

    C Tim Pawlenty Pawlenty was another one that needed to hit it out of the park and did not.  I personally find Pawlenty to be a good general election candidate, but the primary is going to be a little difficult for him.  He is the Anti-Obama in certain ways, that I think would translate well with independents, but not very well with GOP primary voters.  He must do well this weekend in the straw poll, or his candidacy is all but over.  I think he will be one of the first to drop out. 

    C- Newt Gingrich Newt found a way to look like a brilliant strategist and all out bafoon all in one evening.  He came across as angry and defensive.  He called out Chris Wallace for asking “Gotcha” questions.  Sorry Newt, but if you can’t run a campaign you certainly are capable of running a super power that is in major crisis.  I think he won’t be too far behind Pawlenty in dropping out.

    F John Huntsman  He barely answered the questions.  He kept referring to his record as Governor of Utah.  Excuse Mr. Huntsman, but I don’t live in Utah and don’t know what the record is.  If you want me to judge you on that record, the very least you can do is tell me what it is. 

    F Ron Paul I would give him a lower grade if one existed.  While I agree with Paul on many fiscal issues, his answer to Iran was downright scary.  A person who believes that a nuclear armed Iran is not a danger to the United States cannot be president.  Doesn’t Iran call us the Great Satan?  I think they do.  Some of the extremist Muslims in Iran have no respect for human life, Jihad is a great calling as far as they are concerned so killing large groups of people is nothing to them.  One of the main jobs of the President is to provide national security to the country.  A Paul presidency would embolden our enemies and make us a target. 

    Here is a good clip on Iran.

    This was classic.  Paul fans think he got the best of Santorum on this, I don’t happen to agree.

     
    • SignPainterGuy 11:39 PM on 08/12/2011 Permalink | Reply

      I`m with you on Santorum`s grade, he did very well and I give him the win as well.

      How so many pundits could give the win to Romney is a dead giveaway to his “rino / GOP / It`s my turn” connections. At best AFAIC, he just didn`t lose ! C at best.

      Cain did well for me; Good econ. solutions, but I wish he`d suggested lowering corp. tax rates to ZERO instead of 25%. (customers pay ALL business expenses) Biz is nuthin` w/o customers. B+

      Bachmann and T-Paw were sicked on ea. other by Wallace; better that inter-panel attacks had not been a feature, but Chris started it anyway. Bachmann`s answer to York`s dorky Q about submission…..really unnecessary ! What did he want, “Yes Byron, I head for the mattress any time Mark points and snaps his fingers !” ? She is a monument to class in my book ! B+

      T_Paw, not a fan; he looks to be the GOP pick for Romney`s VP, so not a serious pres candidate, came across as a bit nastier toward Michele than she to him (IMO). C+ (being generous)

      Gingrich smacked-down Brett (representing the MSM) like we`ve all wanted to hear from pols forever. I`m not gonna cut him for that. He has many good ideas and can articulate them well and did. He has proven himself to be a rino; NO RINOS for me; I can`t trust him though I really wish I could.A- for articulation / C for trust.

      Huntsman can go home now, nuff said ! F Why was he even there ?

      Ron Paul is a serious mental case. He makes sense for about as long as it takes to say, “Ron Paul makes sense !” Then he`s OFF THE RESERVATION ! He does have some good econ ideas, but his loonacy regarding Nat`l threats is too scary. Advisory role only. D-

      Bachmann. Cain and Santorum are the only 3 I`m considering among those who`ve announced and may later, except Palin, who I`d rather see as GOP Chair.

      • just a conservative girl 5:26 PM on 08/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

        You think you are making joke about what some people think that submissive to your husband means. Your joke is the reason that the question needed to be asked. Many in this country don’t understand what the bibical meaning of submissive to your husband means. York did the right thing in asking the question. She handled the question very well, but it is a discussion that needs to happen in this country. The far left feminists will never get it, but others can made to understand how I view myself as a Christian wife.

        • SignPainterGuy 12:45 AM on 08/15/2011 Permalink | Reply

          No, ma`am, I didn`t really mean it as a joke…….I meant more as a wise crack at Byron….. I meant it as a demonstration, as you say, of what many Christians and probably most non-Christians think “submission” means. It goes far beyond that, but boils down to, after respect of each other`s opinions and ideas and desires, etc. have been discussed, it is the place of the husband, “The Head of the Household / Wife / Family”, to make the final decision, accepting the responsibility of that position. He is NOT the boss, NOT to be thought of as the most important, but, “The Head”. The wife is not less than or less important than the husband, Not to be “under” him, “behind him in step”, she is every bit as important, possessing all the value of the husband.

          Along with the command by GOD for the husband to be head of the wife / family, there is also the command to husbands “To love you wife” !

          I can only hope I`ve said it right; my pastor (mid `90s) worked hard to help our discipleship class to understand it.

          “Submission” is often misunderstood as “to cleave” unto your husband / wife.

          Byron may have been trying to determine if Michele would yield to her husband`s ideas were she to be elected Pres. if she and he differed in opinion …… By her reaction, “Thank you Byron for THAT question !”, indicating it was a bit embarrassing, so I felt he may have been confusing “Submit” with “Cleave unto him”. Was I entirely wrong ?

          Yes, Michele answered VERY WELL indeed ! As I said in the first post, she is a monument to class ! AND, I have no doubt, jacg, that you are yourself a monument to the Christian Wife !

  • just a conservative girl 10:31 PM on 06/13/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , presidential race, Ron Paul,   

    The CNN Debate 

    Just some quick thoughts as I don’t have a great deal of time. 

     I think that Michele Bachman did a great job.  She sometimes has a habit of getting her facts a little mixed up, but not tonight.  She showed that she is able to stay on topic and answer questions with quick soundbites that get to the point. 

     I think that Tim Pawlenty was the big winner tonight.  He came across as likable, knowledgeable, and a good conservative.  Job well done. 

     Newt showed why he has been described as the brain or the idea guy.  He is in his element in a debate format and tonight was no exception.  The big downside was that he outright lied in my opinion.  He is sticking to his ridiculous story that what he said about Paul Ryan was taken out of context.  It was a live interview Newt, we ain’t buying what you are trying to sell with this one.  You just made yourself look dishonest. 

     Herman Cain I think was one of the biggest losers.  Not because of his answers, just that he wasn’t given much of a chance to speak.  The questions went mainly to Romney, Newt, and Pawlenty.  I guess these are the three that CNN has deigned the viable candidates for the nomination.  Overall his performance was strong, just not nearly enough face time. 

     Ron Paul was Ron Paul.  I agree with much of what he would do on fiscal policy, but he loses me on social issues and foreign policy. 

     Romney was doing his somersaults about Romneycare or as Pawlenty’s newest phrase Obamney Care.  Not happening Mitt.  I am not buying it, you seem unwilling to sign an all out repeal and nothing less is acceptable.  Screw this waiver idea of yours. 

     Rick Santorum also did pretty well, he showed he can debate with the rest of the field.  Santorum is out for me, I will not vote for him even if he is the nominee so I don’t really care what he has to say. 

     What I did find refreshing is that they talked about some of the third rail topics.  Ethanol and entitlement reform.  We need to open and honest to the American people, we are broke and it is time we take on the tough and scary subjects.  We are almost out of road and can no longer just the kick the can.  The right needs to talk openly and honestly about these topics and not allow the media and the left to turn this into throwing granny over the cliff scenario.  Oh, wait they already did that. 

     What are your thoughts? 

     
    • zillaoftheresistance 7:14 AM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

      What do you have against Rick Santorum?

      • just a conservative girl 9:33 AM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

        Nothing against him. I won’t vote for anyone who has young children. I seriously question the judgement of anyone who would purposely put their young kids in that fishbowl. Not a healthy environment for them to grow up in.

        Old fashioned idea, yes. Out of the mainstream, yes. But it is a principle I believe in. No young kids in the White House.

        • zillaoftheresistance 8:07 PM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

          So if he were the nominee would you not vote, vote for Obama, or go 3rd party? I’m voting to get Obama out of the White House, even if I have to hold my nose to vote for a GOP ticket that I don’t like. Obama is too danged destructive, we can’t survive another 4 years of him.

          • just a conservative girl 8:48 PM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

            I wouldn’t vote for Obama. 3rd Party is pretty hard in Virginia, so I guess I wouldn’t vote. I have the luxury of it being a red state. Yes, it went to Obama last time but that was an abhorition. So I am not all that worried about it.

            But I will NOT bend on this principle. Family is the bedrock of our society and should be only second to God. If someone doesn’t put the well being of their child first, than they don’t deserve my vote.

            • zillaoftheresistance 9:22 PM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

              So no Sarah Palin for you then. Are Cain’s kids grown? What about Bachmann? I know she’s got a lot of kids but I don’t know their ages.

              • just a conservative girl 10:36 PM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

                Palin is out. Cain is grandpa so his kids are older. Bachmann’s are all grown as well. The only other one that may be an issue for me could be Pawlenty. I think his kids are right at the age that I would vote for them. I think they are all teenagers. Which to me is still a little young, but at least they have a better comprehension of things at that age.

    • Obi's Sister 8:26 PM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

      I was pleased that they didn’t attack each other. Obama MUST BE A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT.

      • just a conservative girl 10:37 PM on 06/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

        Me too. Pawlenty got quite a bit of pushback today for not going after Romney, but I think there is still time for that. Especially since you consider that Romney is wimping out for the Iowa straw poll.

  • nosheepleshere 3:56 PM on 02/13/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: CPAC 2011, , Ron Paul, Young Americans for Freedom   

    Ron Paul, The “Ronulans” and The Young Americans For Freedom Kerfuffle 

    Let me state for the record that I am not a Ron Paul supporter and doubt very seriously if I could ever be swayed to become one.  I have a strong opinion about the Texas Congressman.  He grates on my nerves more than a rotten rendition of the National Anthem by Christina Aguilera.

    Following the announcement at the 2011 CPAC that Paul had won the straw poll, Young Americans for Freedom issued a press release advising that the group had voted him off its national advisory board.

    Jordan Marks, the group’s National Director, said, “It’s a sad day in American history when a one-time conservative/libertarian stalwart has fallen more out of touch with America’s needs for national security than our current socialist presidential regime.”

    Marks went on to harshly say, “Rep. Paul is clearly off his meds and must be purged from public office.  YAF is starting the process by removing him from our national advisory board.  Good riddance and he won’t be missed.”

    Responding to YAF’s announcement, Ron Paul’s political director and an in-law, Jesse Benton belligerently said, “I haven’t heard of YAF doing anything in years, I thought they were defunct.  Young Americans for Liberty is the group of the future.”

    This “group of the future” is the national youth affiliate of the Ron Paul Revolution and was officially launched in December 2008 so it stands to reason that Benton would try to trivialize their decision to oust him.

    Politico notes that the Paul group sought to skew the straw poll by buying 1,000 tickets to the conference and a Paul aide told another Republican that they’d recruited at least 700 supporters to vote for him.  What this says to me is that his “Ronulans” are more adept at winning him beauty contests than primaries.

    Ron Paul’s zombie cult of “Ronulans” showed their asses when they chose to heckle former Vice President Dick Cheney who was at CPAC to present Donald Rumsfeld with the “Defender of the Constitution” award by calling him a “war criminal”.  They also yelled, “Where’s Bin Laden?”, “murdering scum” and “draft dodger.”  Nice.

    It was this exhibition of incivility that prompted Donald Trump, another CPAC featured speaker and potential presidential candidate to declare, “By the way, Ron Paul cannot get elected. I’m sorry, folks. I like Ron Paul, but he has zero chance of getting elected.”

    Ron Paul is so far out there that he’s literally in orbit; hence his followers are referred to as “Ronulans.”

    Let’s begin with why I dislike Ron Paul. 

    He proselytizes fiscal sanity yet he is one of five U.S. House members who brought home more total earmarked money—54 earmarks totaling $398,460,640—three of the five Congressmen were defeated in the 2010 November mid-term elections.  So he’s not really a crusader against spending.

    Paul consistently hypes gold and the gold standard.  His personal wealth is almost entirely invested in the precious metal and its mining stocks.  He is mesmerized by the aura of gold so if his political stance is heeded his personal wealth increases exponentially. So he’s the pot calling the kettle black.

    Further, Ron Paul is against “foreign entanglements”.  Isolationism is not intelligent. How would he deal with an international menace?

    John Bolton, speaking at CPAC 2011, took a stand against Libertarian-leaning Republicans like Ron Paul to reduce defense spending by saying now is “not the time for indiscriminate budget cuts in our national defense budget.”

    In his often recited critique of 9/11, Paul never once mentions the fiery rage of jihadi fundamentalism that aims to restore “the lost caliphate” and invoke medieval Sharia law. In Paul’s world, resentment towards “U.S. entanglements” led a group of sexually repressed Muslim men, brought up on a doctrine of aggressive Wahhabism and the promise of seventy-two virgins to crash two planes into the World Trade Center.

    Not once does he answer why, if U.S. foreign policy causes so many people around the world to “hate us,” Islamic murderers carry out their suicide bombings  in India, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Nigeria, and other unaligned Muslim nations.

    From 2007 in the Washington Post, here’s Paul talking about America’s defenses:

    “There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today…I mean, we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we’re acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapon.”

    Not only does his rhetoric shadow that of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s “wiping off the map” threats, it unforgivably ignores the fact that a domestic passenger flight from Boston to Los Angeles is at the root of the tragic events of 9/11.  Try as I might, I fail to see how a submarine can penetrate terrorism.  I regard his statement as ludicrous fantasy.

    Finally, there is a piece I found at American Thinker dated November 17, 2007 which sheds light on Paul’s apparent unwillingness to reject extremist groups’ public participation in his campaign and financial support.

    In a word, I find Ron Paul to be reckless.

    Read more at No Sheeples Here.

     
    • just a conservative girl 4:17 PM on 02/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

      The fact that Paul seems to attract all these conspiracy theorists and anti semites says something. There is a reason why these people gravitate towards him. This is reason enough for me to say that I don’t like him nor does he have a chance of winning a national election.

      It will be interesting to see if he does indeed try for the senate seat or he decides to go for another failed presidential bid.

    • Teresa 4:18 PM on 02/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

      You hit the nail on the head! I cannot support Ron Paul’s recklessness either. Its like Paul and the “Ronulans” are oblivious to reality, the reality of both evil and threats against us.

    • zillaoftheresistance 4:43 PM on 02/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

      I’ve been blocking delusional, 9/11 truther, Jew hating Ron Paul fans from my facebook for as long as I’ve been on facebook. They could give the swooning Obamazombies a run for their money in a mindless adulation & hate anyone who disses the (false) prophet contest. I don’t understand what people see in the little guy, I find him both creepy and kooky, but that’s just my humble opinion.

    • Chris Wysocki 7:41 PM on 02/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

      I agree 100%. Ron Paul is nuts. His only sane idea is “audit the Fed”, except his solution to the Fed is to blow up our banking and monetary systems and start over.. Spend 5 minutes with a Paulestinian and you find yourself questioning your own sanity. He’s a Blame America Firster, a 9/11 Truther, a Nazi-sympathizer, and his version of banking would effectively eliminate the credit markets. His head-in-the-sand foreign policy is sophomoric at best.

      Fortunately, as Donald Trump said, Ron Paul is unelectable. He won’t come within 10 light years of the Republican nomination.

      @zilla – for sheer comedic value you can’t beat the Ronulans. I have a few Real Life friends who drank the RP Kool Aid and their Facebook / Twitter antics are a never-ending source of amusement.

    • SignPainterGuy 9:53 PM on 02/13/2011 Permalink | Reply

      Ron Paul makes sense for about as long as it takes to say, “Ron Paul makes sense !” After that, he`s OFF THE RESERVATION !

    • Yukio Ngaby 8:45 AM on 02/14/2011 Permalink | Reply

      Some of the most interesting (read that as disturbing) discussions I have had online have been with Ronulans (I guess I can’t exactly call them Paulians anymore). It is not unlike dealing with cultists– which I have done several different times in my life– and it was research, so no I was never part of a cult.

      The money quote was “It doesn’t matter what you say. Soon we will be following the path the good doctor has shown us.” Nope. Not creepy at all… right?

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel