Yesterday morning I asked if Ron paul helps or hurts. Yesterday afternoon he answered the question I think.
In two separate articles Paul made clearer the role he sees himself playing in the future of the Republican Party.
"The truth is, I'm trying to save the Republican Party from themselves because they want perpetual wars, they don't care about presidents who assassinate American citizens, they don't care about searching our houses without search warrants, and these are the kind of things people care about," Paul said on CBS' "Face the Nation."
First of all after having devoted my life to helping the republican party I admire any man who is truly trying to save it. But for Ron Paul to say that the party wants perpetual wars, doesn't care about presidents who assassinate American citizens, doesn't care about illegal searches or the kinds of things ordinary people care about is *expletive deleted* insulting!
In fact, it's not only insulting, it's compelling evidence how self righteous and out of touch Ron Paul is with the heart and soul of we republicans who have been working within the system our entire lives.
How dare he climb up on his rickety old high horse and accuse me of such things? I spoke out against the Patriot Act in the very beginning, at a time in fact when it was considered un-patriotic to challenge President Bush. I spoke out against the NDAA from the get go. I have been fighting to defend the Constitution every single day of my adult life.
Has Ron Paul finally gone completely insane? Does he really think that we don't care about presidents assassinating American citizens? What a rude thing to say.
What he is really doing is not trying to save the Republican Party but trying to disparage it, slander our members and split off some of our voters into his own camp, dividing our troops and weakening our ability to win against the liberals who want to sacrifice Israel to the Jihadists, sacrifice our national security in the name of reducing the size of the mean old government, and cutting federal spending to the bone just as millions of Americans are heading into their most vulnerable senior years, counting on the programs which they were promised would be their when they needed them the most.
Trying to save the Republican Party my patooty!
Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Monday he hasn't decided whether he will support the party's eventual nominee, saying concerns over spending, foreign policy and civil liberties could keep him from endorsing the winner.
"I haven't decided," Paul said when asked about whether he would support the GOP candidate during an appearance Monday on WMAL, a Washington, D.C., radio station.
Paul also left the door wider open than he has in past statements about a potential third-party bid, saying he would weigh an outside run "after the votes are counted." [The Hill]
No, quite the contrary, Ron Paul has successfully mesmerized a large number of people into believing that his political movement is non-political. He has convinced an audience of discontented voters to ignore his many years in Congress and to adopt the completely illogical illusion that he is not a career politician.
He has persuaded people with sleight of hand to believe that what he is doing is not "politics as usual" yet all the while employing the usual political skills of raising money, crafting slick commercials, delivering confusing speeches, denying his own words and mobilizing people to his cause that all the other politicians he says he dislikes have been using for decades.
And what is the response of his groupies when confronted with the facts? They lash out the same way they complain the establishment lashes out against them, they argue that they must first win by using the same tactics they say they hate because it's the only way they can win and eventually change the rules from the inside.
Not only is our nation being divided, but our party is being divided. And while people like me have no problem speaking out against the policies of the GOP which we think are wrong, we don't throw down our arms, run from the battlefield and join up with another army in the middle of a raging war which threatens the very survival of our nation.
There's a word for such behavior, and the men who run from battle. There's a word for men who fire upon their own "to save them".
Does Ron Paul hurt or help? I think he has answered that one for himself pretty clearly.
And for those who think like he does, you have been defined by the company you keep.
Ron Paul is not speaking of the Republican grass roots but of the establishment in many areas. He speaks in short hand and those who support him know what he is talking about. He doesn't 'focus group' what he says, and tries to answer, directly, EVERY question he is asked. If you WANT to find something to hold against him you always can, if you don't want to look into what he meant.
Across the country local GOP organizations are breaking rules to stop his delegates. Some, as in Washington, are saying he is 'dangerous to the party' and people should be willing to vote for anyone else -- trying to get all non-Paul slates in a state where he took second. In Georgia, in Missouri, the list goes on (in MO one of his supporters trying to continue an improperly adjurned caucus was actually taken away in handcuffs at the behest of the local party group -- even though he himself was a member of the GOP central committee for that county -- simply because people were listening to him as he explained requirements for drafting a roster and continuing the caucus).
So he sees this and responds to this. Obviously he isn't speaking about the body of the GOP -- just some of the entrenched interests who seem to think the rules they make only have to be followed by others.
Posted by: spinnikerca | April 04, 2012 at 12:22 PM
I am trying to figure something out.
Ron Paul has been an elected Republican official for almost 40 years.
You say he is trying to take over the party.
What exactly are you trying to say?
Has he been laying low for 30 years as a covert spy from the Libertarian Party? Laying low as an elected Republican congressman?
Posted by: Mr. Scott Ryan | April 04, 2012 at 07:30 AM
These people are void of understanding, they lack the skills to comprehend reality. Sorry but politics is a team sport when someone is out for blood in their own party there is something desperately wrong with the last brain cell they might have left. Paul is such a hypocrite, he says he is for term limits, yet he has been in congress since 1997 , says he is not for earmarks, yet votes no one bills where he knows it will make no difference and still brings home the bacon to his district .. let's look here at
Federal spending in anti-government Rep. Ron Paul’s (R-TX) district has quadrupled since 1999 to more than $4 billion, making Texas’ 14th congressional district one of the highest per-capita federal spenders in the country. With $14,707 spent per resident annually, it is clear that Paul’s constant bellyaching about overly-indulgent government spending is nothing but empty rhetoric used to rouse political support for his presidential bid. Maybe his supporters can't read ??? or Maybe they just don't care what their Messiah does even when it's hypocritical .I guess they don't care about integrity and ethics . There seems to be a pattern here.
More recently in an investigation this was found while Paul was ranting about the evils of FEMA, his office was behind closed doors planning what they could do with the new federal funds, which eventually included rebuilding 180 homes, reconstructing the county’s seawall, and embarking on an extensive beach nourishment project. OF course Ron Paul has an explanation for his seemingly hypocritical behavior of railing against government programs, but then quietly grabbing his share of federal funds: Paul, "blame it on the government itself. “If they are going to allot the money, I have a responsibility to represent my people. He is a hypocrite with a silver tongue and only ill informed , naive folks would ever follow him.
Posted by: G | April 04, 2012 at 12:48 AM
Why were you a member of the Ron Paul Forums?
Why do you disagree with Jim DeMint?
Posted by: Mitch McConnell | April 03, 2012 at 03:14 PM
Marc, can you give us a rundown on Kentucky's Republican delegation in Congress and how they voted on NDAA and the Patriot Act? Was Ron Paul speaking of rank and file (unelected) Republican voters or was he speaking of those "Republicans" that were nominated and elected to congress?
[Marc's reply: Senate: McConnell 'yea', Paul 'nay'
House: Whitfield 'yea', Guthrie 'yea', Yarmuth 'nay', Davis 'yea', Rogers 'yea' Chandler 'yea'.
I don't know who Paul was talking about. Lack of specificity is pretty inclusive in my book.]
Posted by: John | April 03, 2012 at 11:33 AM
Again, policy makers do not respond to voters who say, "Hey, you shouldn't co-sponsor and vote for NDAA and stand by for assasination of American citizens, but since you're my party's nominee, I'll vote for you anyway...just less enthusiastically."
They respond to people who cost them elections for supporting such things.
Politics isn't a team sport, it's a bloodsport. Sorry this upsets you so much, but frankly, this kind of outrage shows us that our tatics work, and give us all the reason we need to double down on them.
And again, I'll be happy to have you on our side in 2016.
Posted by: Adam Love | April 03, 2012 at 09:42 AM