Interesting e-mail From Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty

ebacon · #1 10-30-2012, 04:10 PM

Well if this doesn't make the riff within the Republican party clear:

Quote:

. . .

If Barack Obama wins, we'll have more Big Government schemes, government spying, and Keynesian economic policies than we can fight!

And when you dig into Mitt Romney's detailed plans and look at his record, you can see a commitment to many of these same things, though perhaps not as extreme.

As we saw in the Bush years, it can be even HARDER to mobilize against Big Government schemes when they have the official seal of approval from a Republican administration.

The sad fact is, in a Romney Administration, I fear many "Tea Party" groups around the nation will fall in line behind the Republican establishment.

You and I could be the last line of defense. . . .

icenine · #2 10-30-2012, 04:22 PM

Ron Paul has been a government worker for many years, and his ideas, some of which are good and some of which are really bad, do not fit in with mainstream American consensual political ideology.

Obama and Romney are far apart on social issues but there is a consensus among the majority of Americans that neither one would be too extreme to be President. Ron Paul is not in the mix. He might have been ready for America, but we were not and are not ready for him.

bhunter · #3 10-30-2012, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icenine

Ron Paul has been a government worker for many years, and his ideas, some of which are good and some of which are really bad, do not fit in with mainstream American consensual political ideology.

Obama and Romney are far apart on social issues but there is a consensus among the majority of Americans that neither one would be too extreme to be President. Ron Paul is not in the mix. He might have been ready for America, but we were not and are not ready for him.

Nicely stated! Ron Paul says a lot of good things but will then go into his scary uncle routine.

ebacon · #4 10-30-2012, 06:50 PM

What do you guys mean when you say, "we were not and are not ready for him" and "scary uncle routine"?

finnbow · #5 10-30-2012, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebacon

What do you guys mean when you say, "we were not and are not ready for him" and "scary uncle routine"?

With all due respect, it should be apparent.

ebacon · #6 10-30-2012, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by finnbow

With all due respect, it should be apparent.

It's not. Throw me a bone.

finnbow · #7 10-30-2012, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebacon

It's not. Throw me a bone.

He just seems like a crazy uncle character, kinda like Arte Johnson or Henry Gibson. For most people, he's hard to take seriously.

icenine · #8 10-30-2012, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebacon

What do you guys mean when you say, "we were not and are not ready for him" and "scary uncle routine"?

http://www.amazon.com/American-Polit.../dp/0679723153

Americans are not really that far divided despite all of the rhetoric and the supposed chasm between the two main parties; the author to whom I have alluded to above basic premise is that the most effective leaders of our nation have governed from the middle with the consent of the majority of the populace, and despite everything most people Democrat or Republican basically share the same principles with a few differences. In other words consensus rules the day.

Of course the breakdown of this was the Civil War. Did you know that in the years preceding that war people of the Democrat and Whig (and then later on the Republican Party) parties did not let their children play together? Imagine that happening to today? Of course it does not...and if it did again become normal I would be afraid since maybe another civil war was coming lol.....

I think if Ron Paul was for real he would have run as a national third party candidate.....
mounted a campaign like Ross Perot or Ralph Nader. That he did not do this
( and Romney would have been the candidate to do it to) shows that he is loyal to the Republican establishment because he knows he would have thrown the election to Obama. A true believer would not have cared what happened to his party. So I view him with some skepticism. If he really is against a Republican party that was just fiscal in name only why is he on the sidelines? Or still in the Party?

icenine · #9 10-30-2012, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter

Nicely stated! Ron Paul says a lot of good things but will then go into his scary uncle routine.

Thanks! We have found consensus on one thing

nice day today

ebacon · #10 10-30-2012, 08:20 PM

OK. So we have Ron Paul looks and sounds funny and he can't be trusted because he is tagged as a Republican.

Deep thinking folks. Real deep.

I get that looks and presentation are part of the schtick when it comes to electability. Fine. Also, as a practical matter his vote pattern is more in line with Republican planks when it comes to small federal government than all other Republicans. That makes him the real Republican where it counts and the rest RINOs.

Any comments on his policy positions?